Teaching and Learning Science: Towards a Personalized Approach

PRESS

Maidenhead UNIVERSITY OPEN

Hodson Derek

approach personalized a Towards SCIENCE LEARNING AND TEACHING

Philadelphia Buckingham Press University Open

Hodson Derek

approach personalized a Towards SCIENCE LEARNING AND TEACHING

Open University Press McGraw-Hill Education McGraw—Hill House

Shoppenhangers Road Maidenhead Berkshire SL6 2QL

email: [email protected] world wide web: www.openup.co.uk First Published 1998 Reprinted 2003

Copyright © Derek Hodson, 1998 All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purpose of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence from the Copyright Licensing Agency Limited. Details of such licences (for reprographic reproduction) may be obtained from the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd of 90 Tottenham Court Road, London,W1P OLP. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN

0 335 20116 4 (hb)

0335 20115 6 (pb)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hodson, Derek. Teaching and learning science : towards a personalized approach / Derek Hodson. p.

cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0—335—20116—4. — ISBN 0—335—20115—6 (pb) 1. Science—Study and teaching—Psychology 2. Individualized instruction. 3. Cognitive psychology 4. Motivation (Psychology) I. Title.

Q181.H69

1998 507.1 '2—dc2l

Typeset by Graphicraft Ltd, Hong Kong Printed and bound in Great Britain by Marston Book Services Limited, Oxford

98—3374

everything for Susie,

To

References

181

Index

198

11

assimilation without enculturation line: the Walking

127

12

work practical through understanding personal developing and Exploring

143

language through understanding personal developing and Exploring

154

teacher the of role the work: it Making

168

112

14 13

learning and science in Authenticity 10

1

literacy scientific of pursuit In

1

2

science personalized a Towards

9

3

learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

23

4

science learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

34

5

constructivism of paradox The

44

6

affective the Prioritizing

58

7

8

enculturation as education Science learning of dimensions social some Exploring

74

9

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

100

84

viii

Acknowledgements

Contents

...

... Acknowledgements

This book would not have been possible without the constant inspiration and encouragement of my wife, Sue Hodson, and the unfailing interest and support of Julie, Jolie, Gareth and Paul. My thinking has also been immeasurably sharpened and my ideas have been refined by discussion with numerous OISE graduate students, with whom it has been a pleasure and privilege to work for the past six years.

Thanks are also due to the University of Illinois Press for permission to reproduce Figure 2.1 (from P.B. Porter (1954) Another puzzle picture, American Journal of Psychology, 67, 550—1) and the Open University for permission to reproduce Figure 11.1 (from Hodson 1993d).

A society which places such great value on education and schooling that it requires the individual to attend school for long periods of time must find the means to make education attractive and meaningful to the individual learner. (Benjamin S. Bloom 1976)

length. at quoting worth is and literacy, scientific of notion the surrounding rhetoric the of much of typical is 42) (1988: Shahn by article decade-old a of paragraph opening The education. science of goals the for term substitute a as used being increasingly is and science', 'authentic recent more the with along calls, rallying or slogans today's of one as established become has it term, new a means no by is literacy scientific Although added). emphasis 44, 1990: (Alberta) Education of (Ministry package' coherent a in education science curriculum of of goals the all present and organize to opportunity an is concept society) and technology (science, STS 'The literacy. scientific of goal overarching its and 1996) Yager 1994; Aikenhead and (Solomon education (STS) science—technology—society of notion umbrella the under subsumed are goals disparate these of many that argued widely been has it years, recent In capability). technological for (science making' for 'science and environment) and life of quality the improving for (knowledge nurturing' for 'science include to list this extended has (1994) Fensham foundations. solid explainer; as self explanations; correct development; skill scientific decisions; technology, science, science; of structure coping; everyday emphases': 'curriculum of range a exhibit curricula science Roberts, says consequence, a As tion. degrada- environmental of problems and crises social needs, economic to responding of means a as it see others Yet citizenship. responsible for tion prepara- about is it others, for scientists; future of education and selection the about is education science school some, For views. different significantly express to continue like) the and politicians employers, scientists, parents, teachers, (students, stakeholders different question, this on and, education science of purpose overall the as seen is what on depends It depends!' 'it that suggested he when were we than answer satisfactory a to nearer little a only be may we though question, good pretty a still is It education?' science as counts 'What question the posed (1988) Roberts ago, decade A .

.

.

literacy scientific of pursuit In 1

•..

2•

Teaching and learning science

Science illiteracy is a serious problem. At one level it affects nations; because large parts of their populations are not adequately prepared, they cannot train enough technically proficient people to satisfy their economic and defense needs. More basically it affects people; those who are science illiterate are often deprived of the ability to understand the increasingly technological world, to make informed decisions regarding

their health and their environment, to choose careers in remunerative technological fields and, in many ways, to think clearly.

While scientific literacy seems to be almost universally welcomed as a desirable goal, there is little clarity about its meaning (Jenkins 1990; Eisenhart eta!. 1996; Galbraith et al. 1997).' It seems to mean different things to differ-

ent people, though many simply assume that others know what it means and so avoid any attempt at clarification. In one early attempt at clarification, Pella et al. (1966) suggested that it comprises an understanding of: • the basic concepts of science; • the nature of science; • the ethics that control the scientist in his or her work; • the interrelationships of science and society; • the interrelationships of science and the humanities; • the differences between science and technology. A quarter of a century later, Science for All Americans (American Association

for the Advancement of Science 1989: 4) defined a scientifically literate person as 'one who is aware that science, mathematics, and technology are interdependent human enterprises with strengths and limitations; understands key concepts and principles of science; is familiar with the natural world and recognizes both its diversity and unity; and uses scientific knowledge and scientific ways of thinking for individual and social purposes.' Many other definitions, some very similar to these, others strikingly different, can be located in curriculum documents originating in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. The long-standing confusion over the use of terms such as 'literacy', 'illiteracy' and 'literate', where some writers refer to a mere functional competence, while others imply a sensitive awareness of the complexities of language, is

mirrored in the use of the term 'scientific literacy'. Thus, some see 'being scientifically literate' as the capacity to read, with reasonable understanding, lay articles about scientific and technological matters published in newspapers and magazines; others regard it as being in possession of the knowledge, skills and attitudes deemed necessary for a professional scientist. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) document Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy (1993: 322) suggests that: 'People who are literate in science . . are able to use the habits of mind and knowledge of science, mathematics, and technology they have acquired to think about and make sense of many of the ideas, claims, and events that they encounter in everyday life.' There are strong echoes here of Arons's (1983: 93) emphasis .

documents. curriculum STS-oriented other most with shared characteristic a — definition the in included not is students by action sociopolitical action-oriented, is it that declares document the although that interesting is It phenomenon.' or problem issue, an to response in ity, sensitiv- with and creatively skill, and knowledge of resources her/his apply and together draw to able also is but skilled and knowledgeable only not is capable scientifically is who person 'a 15), (1996: SCCC the of words the In position. value underlying an of establishment the and dimension logical techno- and/or scientific a have that issues of range wide a on views own one's of formulation the attitudes, and qualities personal of development the involves also It understanding. and knowledge skills, scientific of tion acquisi- the than more considerably involves capable sdentifically Becoming disposition. responsible and caring a with combined society, in science of role the of awareness critical — sensitivity Scientific creatively. act and think to ability — creativity Scientific works. science way the and ideas scientific of understanding — understanding Scientific scientifically. investigate to ability — competence Scientific mind. of habit enquiring an — curiosity Sdentific

• • •

• •

aspects. related, inter- clearly but distinct, five of terms in described is capability scientific 1996), (SCCC document discussion a In literacy. scientific of instead ability cap- scientific term the adopt to (SCCC) Curriculum the on Council sultative Con- Scottish the prompted has which action for education science with concern this is It ways. just socially and responsible environmentally in act to willingness and capacity the includes also literacy scientific that suggest don't they However, system.' life-support our destroying recklessly of danger in are 'we say, they which, without technology', of uses the on decisions inform should that nature for respect intelligent of kind 'the foster can and problems' local and global its to solutions effective develop 'to knowledge provide can science that state they when democracy responsible onmentally envir- and compassionate socially more a for literacy scientific towards tion atten- direct also 12) 1989: (AAAS Americans All for Science of authors The citizens. many to unfamiliar discourse of mode a in facility their through intimidate who commentators, and politicians scientists, respectable wise other- some add, might one including, — 13) 1989: (AAAS problems' complex to solutions simple of purveyors and artists, flimflam dogmatists, to prey 'easy are citizens capabilities, such Without 1997). Norris 1990; Aikenhead 1980; (Munby independence intellectual of notion the in included been times someon is have capabilities Similar faith.' taken being something when ... for evidence and understood, and answered, addressed, been have ?" the is "What ?" believe... we do "Why know?" we do "How as such tions ques- when recognize to is, that origin; and basis their understand other, the on and conclusions, or models, results, end unverified and asserted of acceptance between hand, one the on 'discriminate, to ability the on 3 •

literacy scientific of pursuit In

4•

Teaching and learning science

My own view, elaborated a little in Chapter 2, is that an STS curriculum is incomplete if it does not include preparing for and taking action, a position that Miller (1993) characterizes as transformational education.2 By deploying the term 'universal critical scientific literacy' throughout this book as my overarching goal for science education, I am signalling my rejection of the long-standing differentiation of science education into high-status, academic/theoretical courses for those deemed to be of high ability and low-status courses oriented towards life-skills for the rest (Hodson and Reid 1988). In my view, we should draw later science specialists from a much wider pool (close to 100 per cent, I hope) of successful, enthusiastic students who have already achieved critical scientific literacy through a common science education. I am also signalling my advocacy of a much more politicized issues-based science education, a central goal of which is to equip students with the capacity and commitment to take appropriate, responsible and effective action on matters of social, economic, environmental and moral-ethical concern.

Achieving critical scientific literacy In a multi-ethnic and increasingly pluralist social environment, there are major problems in achieving such a complex and wide-ranging goal as critical scientific literacy. Clearly it will not be achieved by the traditional means of a subjects-based curriculum presented by transmission methods of teaching or by a shift to a process approach, as some advocates for scientific literacy argue. Many official curriculum documents and textbooks continue to organize subject matter along a 'concepts only' or 'concepts first' approach, despite evidence that even those students deemed to be successful in school

science often cannot apply their scientific understanding in real contexts or in ways that enable them to make sounder and wiser decisions in their everyday lives (Furnham 1992; Layton et al. 1993). Moreover, it seems that very few students expect it to; they do not see scientific knowledge learned

in school as having any currency outside the context of school work (McRobbie and Tobin 1997). If we really want scientific knowledge and understanding to be used for informing action, it must be taught and experienced, at least in part, in the

contexts of use. In this book, I postulate two contexts of use: conducting scientific investigations, both inside and outside laboratories; engaging in social and environmental action. Socially and environmentally responsible behaviour will no more follow directly from knowledge of key concepts than ability to conduct scientific investigations will follow directly from experience of carrying out exercises based on the sub-skills of science (Hodson 1992). In addition, to enable all students to achieve critical scientific literacy,

we must pay much closer attention to the transitions from everyday understanding to scientific ways of understanding and from everyday ways of

science/technology and person-oriented more as presented are technology and science (b) students; individual of experiences personal and aspirations attitudes, values, beliefs, knowledge, the of account takes learning (a) that: ensuring means learning of personalization curriculum, science the of ments ele- major three these to respect With chapters. later in elaborated are that matters — interdependence and interrelatedness their recognize to important is it activities, separate as science doing and science about learning science, learning consider to book the of chapters early the in useful be will it While problem-solving. and inquiry scientific in expertise developing and in engaging — science Doing environment. and society technology, science, among interactions complex the of awareness an and development, and history its of appreciation an science, of methods and nature the of understanding an developing — science about Learning knowledge.

theoretical and conceptual developing and acquiring

—

•

•

science Learning •

elements: major three of terms in considered be will literacy scientific critical of multi-dimensionality the convenience, For

learning of personalization The needs. spiritual and moral aesthetic, emotional,

their to also but development cognitive students' the to only not looks that education an developing by learning, of personalization the by achieved be only can population student diverse increasingly an for literacy scientific critical view, my In personalization. of notion the around arguments principal its organize to and book this write to me led these like Considerations family. and peers from ostracization or exclusion disaffection, in resulting sometimes cost, emotional and social considerable at so do learning science effective in engage do who those of Some alienating. even or uninviting, classroom science the of climate tional emo- and social the find they and employ we methods teaching/learning of kinds the by uninvolved are They aspirations. and interests needs, their to irrelevant consider they content by bored are lessons science in students many present, At belonging. and comfort of sense a feel students all which in environment science school a maintaining and establishing and situations diverse in people diverse by developed and used being science showing tice, prac- scientific and scientists science, of image inclusive and sensitive ally cultur- authentic, more a creating education, science and science of biases inherent the addressing means This class. social and gender ethnicity, to related them of many individuals, by experienced obstacles and barriers cific spe- the to attention more much paying entails also levels participation and access Increasing arguing. and talking of ways scientific to communicating 5

• literacy scientific of pursuit In

6•

Teaching and learning science

education is politicized and infused with sound human and environmental values; (c) every student has the opportunity to conduct scientific investigations and to engage in technological problem-solving tasks of his or her own choosing and design. Science teachers are just as guilty as other teachers of academicizing their

subject, and sometimes more so. We often treat science education as the manipulation of complex, abstract, conceptual schemes that will only later on, if at all, be applied to real situations, events and problems. As a consequence, those who are successful in school science are usually good at remembering and at analysing and tackling academic puzzles, but cannot always use their knowledge in real situations. Many others never in' to science at all. For them, it constitutes esoteric and abstract game playing, remote from their everyday concerns. For some, it is difficult and forbidding, even intimidating, and remains the province of experts. Few students ever achieve a personal understanding of science; few students ever really own

the science they study in school. If we listed the characteristics of science education as it ought to be, or as it needs to be to ensure universal critical scientific literacy, it might look something like this: accessible to all; interesting and exciting; real, relevant and useful; non-sexist (even antisexist) and multicultural/antiradst; personally relevant and humanized; value -laden and caring. Too often, it is more likely to be: elitist and restrictive; boring; abstract, academic and remote from real life; sexist; racist; impersonal and dehumanized; detached, objective and presented as value-neutral. This book is about shifting the balance towards the first list, while recognizing that for teachers working with a highly prescribed official curriculum, as in England and Wales, there is sometimes little room for manoeuvre. Perhaps something can be done about the twin problems of accessibility

and usefulness by paying much more attention to context. One way of setting appropriate contexts, especially for younger students, is to use the old primary (elementary) school tactic of starting with the individual learner and working science and me (my body, the senses, growth and development, health, communication, simple genetics etc.); science and home (science and technology in the home, food and its preparation and storage, natural and synthetic materials, fuels, dyes and paints etc.); science and leisure (sports science, pets, toys, fishing, photography, music etc.); science and work (telecommunications, agricultural science, medicine, forensic science, biotechnology, local industries etc.); science and the environment (local flora and fauna, weather and climate, geology, astronomy, space science etc.). For older students, it can be helpful to organize at least part of the curriculum around the consideration of issues or problems at local, regional, national and global

levels. Such a curriculum has the advantage of being based on the daily experiences of learners and (possibly) would be perceived by them as being more relevant, more important and more useful, both socially and economically. My own research in New Zealand and Canada shows an overwhelming

student preference for science and technology to be located in environmental concerns. By focusing on issues rather than concepts, the curriculum

if

appreciated. fully be to is task teacher's the of magnitude the essential is be may there consensus emerging whatever and advocated being is

what of flavour some however, Clearly, achieved. be can goal a such how discuss to is purpose its Rather, definition. particular a for argue to or literacy, scientific of debate literature the evaluate and examine to book this of purpose the not is It

1

Notes curriculum. the in presented scientists and science of image the to related issues address to used be can personalization of principle the which in ways consider to important is it though, First, students. all for learning useful and ingful mean- achieving of capable experiences learning of design the to central are that personalization of aspects with concerned are 14 to 3 Chapters taking. action and making decision towards ally, eventu- and, principles scientific of understanding functional a towards ships relation- conceptual abstract on concentration a from away knowledge shifts It co-learner. a even or learning, of facilitator a rather, wisdom; accumulated of dispenser the longer no role: different very a in them casts it significantly, Most answers'. 'correct no are there where matters with deal to and values consider to them requires it familiarity; little have they which with areas into venture to teachers requires often It uncertainty. of dimension extra the without is, it as enough scary be can approach issues-based an adopting And content. predetermined no with course a teach to scary very be can It sary. neces- are that support and facilities the provide or resources the assemble can we whether know don't we and skills, and knowledge the have we whether know don't we study, to want they what advance iii know don't we If choice. the make to students allow teachers when problems always are There students. the by identified ones personal some and teacher, the by identified issues global and national regional, local, of bination com- a is position ideal the Perhaps responsibility. social and ethics transfer; information environment; the technology; and industry resources; mineral

and water land, resources; energy agriculture; and food world: the in where any- curriculum issues-based an for framework curriculum overarching ent conveni- a provide enhancement, little a with would, that concern of areas key of number a on focused 1987) (Tendencia Needs Human Future and Education Science on conference Bangalore The them. among choice of ure meas- a students allowing possibly advance, in materials issues-based duce pro- (b) or them; to important as identify students the issue any on based package teaching/learning effective and coherent meaningful, a together putting for responsible developers, curriculum reactive become (a) strategies: two of either adopt can curriculum issues-based an for opting Teachers chapters. subsequent in discussed be to matters are which of all — skills decision-making foster and understanding of personalization the assist self-confidence, build investigation, and inquiry of sense a develop can 7 •

literacy scientific of pursuit In

8•

Teaching and learning science

2 Miller (1993) outlines three basic positions for analysing and describing curricula: transmission, with its focus on traditional subjects taught through traditional didactic methods; transaction, in which education is seen as a dialogue between student and curriculum and through which the student reconstructs knowledge; transformation, which is concerned with individual and social change.

it. do they which in ways the extent, an to and, do to choose they science of kind the influence people of aspirations and values beliefs, experience, knowledge, the which in ways the consider to is science of view personalized more a developing in step first The located. is it which in context sociocultural the by influenced is and influences that endeavour human a is practice scientific that recognition and science of foundations epistemological the of understanding clear a on depends literacy scientific critical that is here arguing am I What illiteracy. scientific from results that disempowerment the to and others on dependence intellectual continued to contributes it Thus, belief. scientific for justification the of scrutiny critical from dents stu- dissuades it 'experts', by pronouncements authoritative non-negotiable, fixed, of collection a as knowledge scientific presenting by Third, further. science pursuing from them discourages so and students of numbers large for offputting immensely is it Second, practice. scientific and science of nature the misrepresents seriously it First, deplored. be to is scientists and science of image depersonalized a such why reasons several are There method.' scientific distinctive a through him to revealable directly is which order an flux, the from order abstracting and reality, objective obscure which curtains the back pushing painstakingly truth, after seeker idealized and depersonalized 'a as garded re- is scientist the words, memorable 32) (1978: Rowell's and Cawthron In other. each with findings and procedures their share readily who and stance, analytical and value-free disinterested, a adopt to required are who viduals indi- honest intellectually and open-minded logical, rational, as portrayed are Scientists universe. the about knowledge factual ascertaining for method reliable and objective all-purpose, powerful, a of application exhaustive and orderly meticulous, the as presented is science curricula, school many In

science

personalized a Towards

•..2

10 • Teaching and learning science

Figure 2.1

Find the hidden man.

The theory dependence of observation The traditional school curriculum description of science says two things about observation. First, nothing enters the mind of the scientist except by way of the senses — that is, the mind is a tabula rasa on which the senses inscribe a

true and faithful record of the world. Second, the validity and reliability of observation statements are independent of the opinions and expectations of the observer and can be readily confirmed by other observers. Neither is true. In reality, we interpret the sense data that enter our consciousness in terms of our prior knowledge, beliefs, expectations and experiences. As Barlex and Carre (1985: 4) say, do not see things as they are, we see them as we are' (emphasis added). Consequently, a change in mental constructs brings about a change in perception. For years, I was unable to see a face in the snowy landscape of Figure 2.1. It remained for me a series of blotches, despite the insistence of colleagues that it reveals the face of Jesus of Nazareth. Earlier this year, confronted by a giant reproduction of the picture at the Ontario Science Centre and urged by my wife to squint, stare hard and think of the familiar

picture of Che Guevara, I finally saw the face. Now I can't look at the picture without seeing the face. Similarly, once you have seen the faces hidden among the foliage in those puzzle pictures often found in children's comics, you can no longer see the trees without the faces. However, it is not the image falling on the retina that has changed. Rather, it is the observer that has changed. The observer now has a different perspective, a different view of the world.

entirely. else something see may indeed, or, investigation under enon phenom- the see to fail may They observable. readily the even 'correctly' observe will students that guarantee no be can there framework, oretical the- appropriate an Without training. and education on crucially depends observation scientific good that point essential the miss curricula science contemporary many observation, 'open-minded' and 'open-eyed' promoting and emphasizing In theory. precedes observation that curriculum, science the through promoted usually view the to contrast stark in is This see'. to expected is he thing of kind the beforehand knows he until information no 'conveys sees person a what says, 133) (1967: Medawar As reference. of frame theoretical sound a is science in observation good to key the Thus, digm. para- accepted currently the with accordance in is, that — 'correctly' observe to how learn to necessary is it ways, of variety a in interpreted be may data sense because Further, them. to ascribe can they meanings the and make can science) school in students (and scientists that observations the determines knowledge prior that follows it framework, theoretical a within place take only can data observational of interpretation and collection the Because volume. and hydration temperature, dissolving, as such concepts involving framework theoretical prior a of light the in made be only can 'C' 20 at litre per grams 205 of ility solub- a has sulphate copper 'Anhydrous as such statement objective simple, apparently an Even communicated. and criticized recorded, be cannot they language, observational adequate an without meaning; given be cannot tions percep- framework, conceptual adequate an Without observer. the to available language observational the on crucially depends observations of usefulness and quality the Thus, allows. framework conceptual and theoretical lying under- the as precise as or vague as are statements such and theory, some of language the in expressed are statements observation Furthermore, meaning.' experience give concepts anything if meaning, concepts .. be will experience our give not does Experience meaningless. then head, empty an with world the confront we 'If 26): (1968: Theobald David by up summed admirably position a — for prepared conceptually not are and for look to how know don't expect, don't you which things observe to possible not simply is It observation. precedes perspective, theoretical some world, the of view Some experienced. have we what and know we what are, we who on depends findings) communicating and inquiry an conducting and designing focus, a (choosing science Doing theory-dependent. is it unbiased, and innocent not is it words, other In making. worth are and made, be can observations particular that suggests which world the of view a poses presup- observation scientific a making practice, In incentive. that provide not does data observational of assembly open-minded the with beginning as science of view traditional The pasture.' at cows like nature of field the over browse cannot 'We says, 29) (1969: Medawar Peter As another. than rather observation one make to incentive an needs scientist A pose. pur- a and attention of focus a requires and process selective a is it, pany accom- that observation and experimentation the and inquiry, Scientific 11 •

.

science personalized a Towards

12 • Teaching and learning science Generalization, laws and theories

;tion

Observation

Predictions

(Producing singular statements)

(Singular statements to be tested)

Figure 2.2

Science as induction.

Scientific method Textbook accounts of science often assert that science proceeds inductively (Figure 2.2) and that inductive generalizations can be relied upon, provided that certain conditions are met. 1 The number of observation statements must be large. 2 The observations must be repeated under a wide variety of conditions. 3 No accepted observation statement should conflict with the derived generalization or universal law. This model of science has enormous appeal and is seen to lend authority and predictive capability to the knowledge it generates. Observations can be made by anyone, by careful use of the senses. No personal, subjective element is involved. The validity of observation statements, when correctly acquired, is not dependent on the opinions and expectations of the observer. Provided that the three conditions for inductive inferences are met, the generalization will be valid. If the generalization is true, any predictions derived from it are bound to be true. Quite apart from the matters already discussed, there are several problems with this model of science. One concerns the three conditions for drawing number of inductive generalizations. What, for example, constitutes a observations? How does one know which variables are significant in attemptvariety of conditions'? How does one know whether ing to provide a a conflicting observation is merely an erroneous reading or a potential falsifier? The answer in each case is, of course, theoretical understanding, but this has been ruled out from the start by insistence that scientific inquiry is objective, value-free and unprejudiced by theory. It is important for students to be brought to the realization that objectivity in science does not consist in placing equal weight on all observations

experiment.' and observation by and theories, accepted other with consistency and consistency internal on based criticism by tested and developed refined, are activities these during generated ideas new how of tion descrip- faithful more a gives that account an it; replace it, modify it, doubt it, test it, criticize it, use it, about think it, explore to attempts and ledge, know- and theory existing with starts that account an — proceeds science how of account realistic more a of favour in it discard should we science, of model traditional this with absurdities and difficulties many so are there If

science of model alternative an Towards 13). 1980: Chalmers (see us reminds turkey inductivist the of tale Russell's Bertrand as wrong, be to out turn still may numerous, however ments, state- singular from derived generalization A valid. logically not is induction words, other In experience.' had have we which of those resemble ence experi- no had have we which of instances those that prove to arguments demonstrative no be can 'There us, reminds 390) (1854: Hume David As observations. single of series a from directly derive they because upon, relied be cannot just generalizations inductive that is problem real the However, mind. prepared the only favours chance observation, scientific in that, saying famous Pasteur's by up summed admirably observation, critical of skills the develop students experiences, such Through them. by unexpected entirely are that experiences with students provide we time to time from that ant import- is it So predicted. the than significant more theoretically be to out turns often unexpected the that is science of features interesting more the of one However, expected. the from way significant any in deviate properties their if them detect to fail will instruments the Moreover, them. detect to instruments design cannot they properties, their about speculate they Unless entities. particular detect to apparatus an design might they how sidering con- by point this appreciate to begin can Students unexpected. the pret misinter- seriously or miss may they expect, they what on only concentrate they if yet anything; see not may they for, look to what know they unless confronted: be can students which with paradox interesting an is There later). (see hand in task the for sophisticated insufficiently is or mistaken, is them underpinning theory the when misleading be also will observations course, Of decisions. these make to are students if essential is perspective theoretical understood well and secure A red. not are stars distant bent, not is water in immersed partially stick a flat, not is Earth the grounds: theoretical on data sense reject often we reality, In observations. reliable against acceptability for theories their test scientists that is message usual The children. tell usually we what of reverse the is This theory. to recourse by acceptability for checked be to have often Observations 1986). (Hodson ones incorrect and irrelevant discard and observations appropriate and relevant select to need they that awareness an to led be should they Rather, emphasize). to seems science of view traditional the which and 'fair' be to consider children that (something 13 •

science personalized a Towards

14 • Teaching and learning science

One such account is Karl Popper's hypothetico-deductive model, in which science proceeds by successive cycles of imagination and criticism (Popper 1968). First, a hypothesis is produced by intuition, by inspired guesswork from an existing theoretical background. From the hypothesis, certain conclusions are deduced and compared among themselves for internal consistency. Next, the conclusions are tested by observation or experiment. If the predictions are borne out, the hypothesis is corroborated; if not, the hypothesis must be modified or discarded. Thus, scientific reasoning is a constant interplay among hypotheses, the logical expectations (predictions) they give

rise to and experimental or observational evidence; a constant dialogue between 'what might be' and 'what is'. In Popper's language, science proceeds by means of a series of conjectures and refutations until it arrives at a theory which satisfactorily explains the evidence (or, more precisely, is not refuted by it). This is not a random 'hit or miss' procedure; there is constant feedback for the modification and restructuring of hypotheses. Each conjecture is made in the light of previous experience. There are several important differences between Popper's view of science and the traditional inductivist view: observation is placed much later; imagination and speculation based on existing theoretical understanding is placed first; falsification, rather than verification, is the central feature of hypothesis testing. In other words, every test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, rather than an attempt to prove it correct. The significance of falsification in Popper's model is a consequence of the asymmetry between confirmation and refutation: while universal statements cannot logically be confirmed by single observations, no matter how numerous, they can be refuted by a single observation. The observation of one black swan falsifies the hypothesis that all swans are white. In other words, falsification is decisive. By exposing hypotheses to a fierce struggle for survival, we ensure that

only the fittest hypotheses survive. 'Fittest' means those that best fit the facts, the observational evidence. By rejecting hypotheses that fail to stand up to observational and experimental test, scientists make progress towards a truer description of the world, because they have ruled out some possible

explanations. Of course, we could never know if we had arrived at the truth; we are all prisoners of our senses, confined by our environment and limited by our imaginations. Scientific truth is simply our current 'best shot' at

explanation. The theories that we hold are no more than provisional, those that we have not yet managed to falsify. An alternative to Popperian ideas is presented in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, where Thomas Kuhn (1970) argues that science is not the orderly, systematic and continuous activity that Popper describes. Rather, it proceeds by successive phases of revolution and consolidation. The disorganized and diverse activities that precede the emergence of a particular science become structured and directed when the community of practitioners reaches agree-

ment on certain theoretical and methodological issues; that is, when the disciplinary matrix (the paradigm, as Kuhn calls it) becomes established and accepted. Workers then practise 'normal science' in an attempt to explore

But true. be may theory a that means simply consistency Such theory. a on status truth confer not does facts observable the with Consistency validity. establish to itself, in insufficient, is adequacy Empirical under-determined. empirically are theories scientific that is science, of image public the into or curriculum, science the into build not do we that message A education. ence sci- in portrayed conventionally is rationality that sense the in not least at rational, and objective entirely not is science words, other In another. over paradigm one of superiority the establishing for criteria empirical purely no are there that follows it data, theory-free furnishing of capable ments experi- critical perform to possible isn't it If model! falsificationist Popper's of decisiveness the for much So performed. be can that experiments or made be can that observations paradigm-independent no are there used; be can that concepts paradigm-independent no are There impossible. even perhaps difficult, is paradigms rival of comparison direct that follows It 149) 1970: (Kuhn direction. same the in point same the from look they when things different see scientists of groups two the worlds, different in tising Prac- space. of matrix curved, a in other the fiat, a in embedded is One mixtures. other the in compounds, are solutions one, In ... worlds ent differ- in trades their practice paradigms competing of proponents The

theories. Lewis the and Lowry—Bronsted the in 'base' and 'acid' or paradigms, Einsteinian and Newtonian the in 'energy' and 'time' 'mass', as such concepts of use the example, for Compare, way. new a in so does it old, the from words uses paradigm new the when Even ways. different in and things, different to attention direct they ideas, and concepts different involve they Because incommensurate. are paradigms rival that argues Kuhn Second, theory. favoured a defend to manoeuvres intellectual pragmatic of kinds all in engage scientists (1978), Lakatos to according Indeed, ways. many in tions observa- counter accommodate can they because resilient are Theories time. the all theories new with live to have would we data, falsifying apparently of face the in resilient remarkably not were theories scientific If opment. devel- and modification through anomaly accommodate to which in space' 'breathing given is paradigm The normal. as accepted are they 'serious', not are these that Provided evidence. falsifying and anomaly of tolerance the is First science. of model Kuhn's in features interesting some are There consolidation. and stability of periods with interspersed revolutions conceptual major of series a through proceeds it discontinuous; is science of path the Kuhn, to according Thus, science. normal new a for guidelines provide and problems the solve satisfactorily can which emerges paradigm new a when resolved is crisis The develops. 'crisis' a then ance, signific- economic or social pressing some have they if or paradigm the of core very the at strike they if time, long a for solution resist they if However, tolerated. and expected be to are anomalies Such encountered. are fications falsi- apparent and problems unsolved Inevitably, accepted. have they validity basic whose and adopted have they paradigm particular the develop and 15 •

science personalized a Towards

16 • Teaching and learning science

so may lots of other theories that also correspond with the observations (Duhem 1962). Moreover, empirical inadequacy is frequently ignored by individual scientists fighting passionately for a well loved theory, and is often

considered subordinate to the 'context of discovery' by the communityappointed validators (Knorr-Cetina 1983). Additional factors that may play a part in bringing about the shift of paradigm allegiance that constitutes a scientific revolution include: • elegance and simplicity (the aesthetics of science); • similarity and consistency with other theories;

• 'intellectual fashion', in the sense of compatibility with trends in other disciplines;

• social and economic considerations; • cultural considerations; • the status of the researchers; • the views of 'significant others' — influential and powerful scientists, journal

editors, publishers and so on; • the priorities of research funding agencies.

If one takes the view that science is a communal activity, and that the ideas of particular scientists only become accepted as scientific knowledge when they achieve consensus within the community of scientists, it follows that many of the sociological, psychological, political and economic issues that influence individuals could, and sometimes will, influence the decisions that the community makes. By failing to address these influences, the simpleminded accounts of theory acceptance and rejection presented in some school science textbooks are insulting to students and often flatly contradict what they read, elsewhere, about real scientists like Galileo, Albert Einstein, Barbara McClintock, Francis Crick and Jim Watson. What these accounts omit is people, and their views, attitudes, passions and prejudices. By contrast, Fuller (1988) writes about the rather wider issues that influence the ways in which scientists present their own work and evaluate each other's. Prominent among them are strong presuppositions or feelings about the way things work, sometimes

before evidence is collected, sometimes despite the evidence that has been collected (Holton 1978; 1986). It would be more appropriate for the school curriculum to emphasize the ways in which knowledge is negotiated within the community of scientists by a complex interplay of theoretical argument, experiment and personal opinion, than to try to project the view that science is independent of the society in which it is located. Criteria of judgement include factors outside pure logic and empirical adequacy, including the social, economic, political, moral and ethical factors that impact on the decision-makers. In other words, science is not value-free and 'people-proof'. As Robert Young (1987: 18) says:

Science is not something in the sky, not a set of eternal truths waiting for discovery. Science is a practice. There is no other science than the

linked. inextricably are status and role • purposes; diverse for designed are structures conceptual •

that: is students of minds the in clearly established be to needs what that say to save book, this of scope the beyond is purposes these of sideration Con- science. of purposes various the meet to order in time over develop and grow they that us shows History temporary. and tentative are tures struc- complex these Moreover, observation. single any on dependent being without phenomena, observable of range a predict and explain describe, to ability their on fall or stand that propositions and concepts interrelated of network a is knowledge scientific algorithms, and rules non-negotiable and definitions strict facts, established well of collection a being than Rather

knowledge scientific of status and role The 1986). Prophet and (Hodson England Victorian in non-scientists and scientists prominent many by held values and beliefs of set a phrenology, of theory the understanding to does it as Newton Isaac of work rationalist elegant the of understanding full a to much as just applies This judgement. of criteria and styles working priorities, their understanding for context the provides worked) (or work scientists particular which within milieu sociocultural the of appreciation contexts, socio-historical their from apart understood be cannot building theory and inquiry scientific of products the that or interests, particular of furtherance in developed is it because simply valid or reliable less is knowledge scientific that claim to absurd be would it While place. and time its of product a extent, large a to is, so and considerations moral-ethical and economic social, by influenced profoundly is it that recognize should we expediency, political and self-interests scientists' of combination a by determined entirely is ence sci- that notion the reject should we While with'. away get can you what as or, power in those of interests is it, 269) (1994: 'truth lampoons Slezak the in is which that is truth' that view relativist dangerously the and — curricula science school in widespread quite still is unfortunately, that, view a — inquiry of methods reliable and objective entirely using viduals indi- disinterested value-free, by ascertained truth absolute is science that view the between balance sensible a achieve we that is important is What

bodies. funding its and system, patronage its system, educational its society, given a for matters are pursued, get they far how asked, get they not or Whether domain. public the enter that results to lead to enough long pursued and asked get that tions ques- the only 'answers' Nature ... pursued get that paths the funded, get that proposals the ask, to scientists to occurred has it that questions the of record the is exists that science The done. gets that science 17 •

science personalized a Towards

18 • Teaching and learning science At the very least, students should be made aware of the crucial distinction between explanatory theories and instrumentalist models. Theories can be described as our 'current best shot' at explaining 'how things are' in the physical world. They should not be regarded as 'true' or as 'proven'. Rather, they should be taken as a more tentative scientific truth: knowledge that has been subjected to, and has survived, critical scrutiny by other scientists using the distinctive procedures and criteria legitimated by the scientific community. Inevitably, theories will change as a consequence of the complex interactions among theoretical speculation, experiment and observation. Models are imaginary conceptual devices for predicting, calculating, manipulating events and generally achieving a measure of control of the environment. Models have no pretentions towards 'truth'; they merely have to work (i.e. to do their job satisfactorily). Whether they correspond to reality or not is irrelevant.

An intriguing feature of science is that models which are initially introduced as predictive devices are sometimes elaborated and developed into theories. On occasions, scientists discover that the entities they had earlier created for instrumental purposes actually exist. Put another way, and somewhat more cautiously, they accumulate observational support for the existence of these entities.2 More frequently, explanatory theories that are superseded by better theories revert to the status of model and continue to fulfil a useful predictive function. It is not illogical or unscientific to retain a falsified or superseded theory in an instrumental capacity, provided that its status is recognized and acknowledged. Within a restricted domain of application, and this applies particularly to school science, it may be simpler to use than current theory. Nor is it illogical or unscientific to use alternative (even seemingly incompatible or contradictory) instrumental models for different aspects of the same phenomenon if all that is sought is a prediction or calculation of a numerical quantity. In a school context, it is common for conflicting wave and particle models to be used side-by-side in accounting for different properties of light. Understanding and successfully using scientific knowledge entails know-

ing something about the justification for and status of different conceptual structures, and knowing when their use is appropriate and inappropriate. Just as it is important for students to learn that in day-to-day life the appropriateness of language and behaviour is dependent on the social context, so it is important for them to recognize that the appropriateness of scientific models and theories is dependent on the kind of issue or problem being addressed. It is important, also, to recognize that the variety of specific purposes that motivate theory building and model building within the sciences ensures that the precise meaning attached to a concept will depend on the specific role that it has within a particular knowledge structure. As suggested earlier, the differences in meaning of mass and energy in the Newtonian and Einsteinian views of the world, and the shift in meaning of acid and base between the Lowry—Bronsted and Lewis theories, illustrate this point very clearly.

fingers') 'green gardener's the of equivalent scientific (the flair perimental ex- creativity, of elements with skills bench and understanding ceptual con- combines It goals. particular achieve to order in way, purposeful a in both use to capacity the is it Rather, other. the on understanding, ceptual con- of possession the and hand, one the on skills, laboratory of possession the from distinct not is It scientist. the of craft and art the of core central the constitutes It science. doing of experience the through only acquired be can that applied, consciously even or articulated, well not often ledge, know- of kind the is It flair. scientific and intuition scientific knowledge, tacit labelled variously been has that expertise of kind a of use make ists scient- strategy, chosen their implementing in and choices their making In barred.' holds no mind, one's with damnedest one's doing than more nothing is method, a is it as far as method, scientific 'the that remark 351) (1950: Bridgman's Percy by up summed best is It times. particular at behaviours ticular par- requires that rules of set a following of matter a not idiosyncratic, and context-dependent reflexive, fluid, holistic, is inquiry scientific Consequently, context. altered an in made are moves and decisions next the that so way, some in situation the changes inquiry an during makes scientist a that move every almost Thus, problem. the of reformulation or idea original the of recasting complete a to even or experiments different and further to ideas, new to leads evaluation that Sometimes etc.). theories other with parison com- experiment, observation, (by evaluation to subjected is it developed, is idea an as soon As time. same the at all proceeding of ways ductive pro- and appropriate more devise and it of understanding greater develop problem, a to approach their refine scientists Further, practitioners. of ity commun- the by approved and available those of range the from procedures and processes of selection a making by hand in task particular the to ate appropri- be to consider they approach an choose scientists situation, ticular par- a approaching In method. no is there sense, that In action. of course own his or her devise to scientist each requires that activity unpredictable untidy, an is science Real 1989). Wellington (see allege education science to approach process so-called the of advocates as steps, transferable and able generaliz- content-free, of series a comprising algorithm all-purpose an of tion applica- simple the not is inquiry Scientific connoisseurship. or expertise scientific in knowledge tacit and intuition of significance the recognizes science' of view 'anarchic so-called Feyerabend's Finally, forces. sociocultural of consideration a for door the opens progress scientific of nature tionary revolu- the about views Kuhn's acknowledging science; into back passion puts protagonists, particular its with each programmes', 'research rival of notion Lakatosian the Including values. and knowledge interests, particular their and people by driven method a but method, rigorous a still is what into back creativity and imagination puts methods Popperian by inductivism Replacing school. in promoted be might inquiry scientific and science of view personalized more a how show to is chapter this of purpose The

scientists and science of view balanced a Achieving 19 •

science personalized a Towards

20 •

Teaching and learning science

and a complex of affective attributes that provide the necessary impetus of determination and commitment. With experience, it develops into what Polanyi (1958) and Oakeshott (1962) call 'connoisseurship'. Thus, scientists proceed partly by rationalization (based on their theoretical understanding) and partly by intuition rooted in their tacit knowledge of how to do science (connoisseurship): 'A practising scientist is continually making judgments for which he can provide no justification beyond saying that that is how things strike him' (Newton-Smith 1981: 81). It is not my wish to portray all scientists as self-serving, cynical opportunists, and it would be a disaster if the science curriculum did so. There is no doubt that scientists' personal, political and religious views impact on the kind of science they choose to do; there is no doubt, either, that intuition, luck (both good and bad), self-interest, personal ambition and academic and publishing pressures will, from time to time, influence the way they do it. The key question, as Loving (1997: 436) reminds us, is 'whether these are the predominant factors driving good science or factors that make science simply a human (and thus imperfect) endeavor.' Above all, I want to remind students that science is carried out by people, and that these people,

like everyone else, have views, values, beliefs and interests. I want the curriculum to show students that these people (scientists) can be warm, sensitive, humorous and passionate. More importantly, I want them to realize that people who are warm, sensitive, humorous and passionate can still become scientists, though they are required to conduct their work in accordance with codes of practice established, scrutinized and maintained by the community of scientists.

Once we put people back into science, we open up the possibility that science can be and has been different. Different groups of people have different priorities, they identify different problems, which they approach in different ways, using different theories, instruments and methods. They may even have different criteria of validity and acceptability. If science has different goals, methods and criteria of judgement, it is inevitable that it will generate different knowledge and different theories. This new curriculum message is that science is not propelled exclusively by its own internal logic. Rather, it is shaped by the personal beliefs and political attitudes of its practitioners and reflects, in part, 'the history, power structures, and political climate of the supportive community' (Dixon 1973: 71). This can be highlighted by historical studies, by studies of non-Western science and by studies of the misuse of science for social and political purposes (Hodson 1993a). By emphasizing that current ideas are no more than the latest in a series of views shaped and influenced by personal and social conditions and attitudes, historical case studies can reinforce understanding of the mechanisms of scientific practice and imbue students with a healthy scepticism regarding scientific claims — an important element in developing critical scientific and technological literacy. When reinforced by consideration of some current thinking concerning feminist science and ethnoscience, for example, these activities will help to impress on students that we can reorient,

impact environmental and societal the recognize to encouraged are students 1, level At difference. a make can they that feel who change, effect to empowered personally feel who those are act who Those problems. the ing solv- and addressing in investment personal a feel and implications) human their (and issues the of understanding personal deep a have who those are act who Those empowerment. and ownership are action into knowledge of translation this to keys The concern. moral-ethical and environmental economic, social, of matters on action effective and responsible appropriate, take to commitment and capacity the with students equip to is curriculum issues-based this of goal central a 1994), (Hodson elsewhere argued As action. taking and for Preparing 4: Level positions. value underlying own one's establishing and views own one's Developing 3: Level power. and wealth of distribution the with linked inextricably is development technological and scientific that Recognizing others. of expense the at be may some to accruing benefits that and interests, particular of pursuit in taken are opment devel- technological and scientific about decisions that Recognizing 2: Level determined. culturally extent, some to are, technology and science that recognizing and change, technological and scientific of impact societal the Appreciating 1: Level sophistication.3 of levels four comprising curriculum issues-based an through achieved be can education science of politicization that is view own My curriculum. the of politicization the necessitates literacy critical words, other In 232). 1992: (Jenkins loses' who and benefits who of question newer the also but science good is science the whether of question traditional the only 'not addresses science school that requires goal That everyone. for literacy technological and scientific critical ensure to is view, my in which, science, in education of purpose very the mistakes it Second, 1986). (Layton not or it recognize we whether positions, value particular embody and reflect that criteria using selected are strategies evaluation and assessment methods, learning and teaching content, curriculum: the of aspect every in embedded are Values impossible. the attempt to teachers asks it First, sense. no or little makes This directions. particular in students influencing or them about ments judge- making avoid to seek and about, teach they practices technological and scientific the underlying values social and interests political the fronting con- avoid studiously teachers Many way. value-free a in so do to try but emphasis), STS (the activity value-laden a is science that teach to attempt they that is initiatives curriculum current some of absurdities the of One

education science of politicization The practices. sound environmentally and just socially more towards technology and science our redirect and reprioritize 21 • science

personalized a Towards

22 •

Teaching and learning science

of science and technology. At level 2, they are sensitized to the sociopolitical nature of scientific and technological practice. At level 3, they are encouraged to become committed to the fight to establish more socially just and environmentally sustainable practices. But only by proceeding to level 4 can we ensure that students acquire the knowledge and skills to intervene effectively in the decision-making processes and ensure that alternative voices,

and their underlying interests and values, are brought to bear on policy decisions. What is being argued here, of course, is that education for critical scientific literacy is inextricably linked with education for political literacy and with the ideology of education as social reconstruction. As Kyle (1996: 1)

puts it: 'Education must be transformed from the passive, technical, and apolitical orientation that is reflective of most students' school-based experiences to an active, critical, and politicized life-long endeavour that transcends the boundaries of classrooms and schools.' Unfortunately, there are many students who feel disempowered by their experiences in school and are increasingly alienated from science. There are many who feel no sense of ownership and certainly no feelings of empowerment, and who continue to regard science as a body of fixed, authoritative knowledge located in textbooks. It is these students who are the principal focus of attention throughout this book.

Notes 1 What follows is a very brief account of several alternative views of scientific method. It is not intended to be a rigorous treatment; its purpose is to indicate some points that collectively constitute a more personalized view of science and, hence, a more appropriate image of science for the school curriculum. 2 This more cautious phrasing recognizes the theory dependence of experiments and

correlational studies, and of the interpretation of evidence provided by them. 3 By reference to four levels I am not suggesting a sequential teaching programme, nor that teachers proceed to level 4 on every topic/issue. The level for any particular issue should be determined by the topic and the learning opportunities it presents, the current knowledge and experience of the learners, what was attempted 'last time' and so on. In short, students should have the experience of reaching level 4 on some (i.e. the most appropriate) topics/issues.

impregnate that assumptions theoretical the about doubts no have they because wax molten is candle burning the of top the on liquid the that know children young very but all example, for candle, burning a observing of exercise familiar the In so. mistakenly but — theory-free allegedly are that terms simpler to return to trying be forever would We progress. make not can- we observations, making for used are terms theory-loaded and granted for taken is theory some Unless understanding. theoretical in rooted ponent com- inferential an them with carry all expansion and contraction solution, and suspension refraction, and reflection like terms Thus, language. observation an provide they granted, for taken and understood well are theories When studied. being events or phenomena the with familiarity and experience of level knowledge, their on depends line' the 'draw individuals particular where and experience, with shifts inference and observation between demarcation the words, other In based. are they which on theories the question, without accept, all we because inference, or calculation without and reliably ively relat- quickly, assent can we which to statements theoretical those merely are statements observation out, points (1962) Feyerabend As change. may ment state- observation an is what and statement theoretical a is what of notion our developed, are techniques instrumentation new when or appears, ory the- new a when Indeed, sense. absolute any in exists distinction a such that believe not do I However, support. will facts the than investigation their from more claim not and evidence the for respect have should scientists that inquiry: scientific good of aspect major a be to consider usually we what to relate to seems and fine, sounds distinction this Superficially, inference'. an and observation an between distinguish to ability the than thinking clear to fundamental more is 'nothing that claims 33) (1988: Abruscato Thus, ence. infer- and observation or theories and facts between is, that — them of tion interpreta- theoretical our and manipulation) their (and data raw between drawn be can distinction clear a that insist curricula science school Many

learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

•..3

24 •

Teaching and learning science

such an observation. To insist that they regard it as an inference is to be pedantic to a degree that can be counterproductive to good science (Geddis 1992).

Secure conceptual understanding is the 'trigger' for changing the language and for making progress towards more sophisticated understanding. With the general acceptance of a theory of solubility, for example, students see things dissolve, where previously they saw them disappear. In addition, once they understand that there is an important conceptual difference between dissolving and melting, they see why it is important to be careful in their use of the terms. Young children, without this conceptual knowledge, will continue to refer to sugar and salt 'melting' in water. They have no reason to do otherwise. This conceptual-linguistic shift can be readily demonstrated to students on those occasions when an observational exercise from earlier in the course is repeated: the new description employs observational language that includes previously unknown theoretical notions. Perhaps solids can now be observed to melt, sublime or decrepitate on heating, whereas previously they just 'changed'. All three of these new terms include theoretical inference. By reflecting on these matters, students can be made aware of the ways in which their own observational skills change and develop as their theoretical understanding becomes more sophisticated. Discussion of the theoretical assumptions underpinning the design of common laboratory instruments (ammeters, voltmeters, pH meters and the like) can also help students to appreciate that the supposed distinction between objective observation and theoretical inference is less clear than some science textbooks would assert, and is more a characteristic of their own stage of conceptual understanding,

and their confidence in that knowledge, than a demarcation between two processes of science.

Arguments similar to those for the theory-ladenness of observation extend to all the other processes of science, such as classifying, measuring, hypothesizing and inferring. One has to classify and measure something, rather than something else; one has to hypothesize about particular entities or events. It simply is not possible to engage in these processes independently of content. Moreover, the way one classifies, measures and hypothesizes, and one's level of sophistication in doing so, depend crucially on one's theoretical understanding. Science education is not about teaching students to observe, classify, measure and hypothesize per Se. They can already do that perfectly well, and have been doing so since long before they came to our science lessons. Moreover, they continue to do so every day in their lives outside the laboratory. What school science is concerned with is scientific observation, scientific classification and scientific hypothesizing. What makes

these processes scientific is the utilization of relevant and appropriate science concepts in pursuit of scientific purpose.

Scientific classification, for example, is not just a matter of noting similarities and differences — or it would be sufficient in science lessons to classify banknotes and postage stamps, using criteria such as country of origin,

colour, size and style of illustration. Rather, it involves the application of

challenged. and tested articulated, necessarily is understanding conceptual on, so and ideas contrasting and comparing experiments, ing design- classifying, observing, Through understanding. that develop and test they so, doing in course, Of activity. scientific of sub-processes other the and observations of sense make to concepts use they rather, science; of processes sub- other the of any by or observation, by concepts new acquire not do students words, other In ideas. around so do they Rather, processes. around knowledge their organize not do learners that is line bottom The 1991). (Gunstone beliefs their with conflict that observations reject may or ently differ- data the 'see' that explanations alternative reject may they Moreover, hold. they views the reflect that patterns find only can Students teacher. the by intended those from substantially differ may find they patterns the but courses, process-oriented by demanded as observations, in patterns find may they experiments, classroom During entirely. else something see may occasions, on or, investigation under phenomenon the see to fail may dents stu- understanding, conceptual appropriate Without impossible. are pretation inter- and experimentation observation, meaningful framework, conceptual appropriate an Without activity. theory-impregnated and theory-driven a is varied systematically and carefully be to are variables which in experiment any of planning the Clearly, fortuitously. except controlled, be can variables no ignorance, of state a In be? to likely are variables the what know menter experi- theory-free a would How studied. being phenomenon the of ledge know- substantial without achieved be variables of control the can Nor prediction. that of test appropriate an constitute would what know to inquiry scientific of methods the about enough knows and prediction the to understanding current his or her from argument of chain a establish can prediction, particular a making for reasons (scientific) good has student the that is matter does what But agree. I matter. not does not or correct is tion predic- a whether that says (1985) McNairy those. make to children aging encour- in value educational of little is there and guesses', 'blind than more no are predictions understanding, theoretical Without consideration? under event or phenomenon the of understanding good some than other tion predic- a of basis the constitute possibly can What contemplated. seriously be to absurd too just is example, for content, of independently made be can predictions that notion The knowledge. theoretical of measure substantial a without out carried be can them of None science. of processes other the all and data recording data, collecting predicting, measuring, with is it So purpose. and fication) classi- for concepts (appropriate theory with linked inextricably therefore, is, patterns' for 'looking or classification involving activity classroom Any task. the to brings classifier the that purpose about expectations and assumptions experience, knowledge, the on crucially depends It categories. theory-based appropriate using and recognizing of matter a is classification successful Consequently, understanding. theoretical different involve may and criteria ent differ- demand purposes Different out. carried being is classification the which for purpose the to suited categories appropriate and significant scientifically 25 •

learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

26 •

Teaching and learning science

Ascertaining children's views Just as existing knowledge determines the kind of scientific activity that students can engage in, so it determines the way in which they respond to new ideas and information. Ausubel (1968: 337) expresses it as follows: 'If I had to reduce all of educational psychology to just a single principle, I would say this: "Find out what the learner already knows and teach him accordingly".' Once we know the kind of understanding learners already have, we can begin to design learning strategies to ensure that they shift in the direction we desire (see Chapter 4), but the necessary first step would appear to be: find out where they currently are. After all, if you want to ensure that someone reaches a particular destination, you start by asking where he or she is now. Ascertaining children's views in science has been a very active and very fruitful area of research during the past decade and a half. It is significant — and, perhaps, fortunate too — that there appear to be certain kinds of understandings held in common. Imagine the task facing a teacher if there

were no common elements in children's understanding. The beliefs that children hold prior to instruction have been variously termed: alternative frameworks, alternative or prior conceptions, mini-theories, naive theories, children's science and so on. Each term has its adherents and its particular justification, but, as yet, there is no universally accepted term, beyond a general concern to avoid the use of misconceptions, a convention to which I am strenuously opposed, as will become apparent later.' Research strategies for ascertaining children's views are as varied as the

terminologies, and include the use of interviews, classroom observation, multiple choice tests, word association methods, concept maps, essays, student diaries, repertory grids and questionnaires. Driver and Erickson (1983)

distinguish between methods which generate data of a verbal nature and those producing behavioural data, claiming that such a distinction defines the positions of the various data collection methods along the conceptual— phenomenological continuum. Situations framed by conceptual constraints generally produce linguistic data and, therefore, are more suitable for eliciting the structure of children's propositional knowledge; situations framed in actual events or phenomena (i.e. contextual constraints) are more likely to elicit behaviours which would inform the student's knowledge-in-action. The significance of this distinction, and the relationship between the methods, will become apparent in later discussion.

This is not an appropriate place to enter into a lengthy consideration of the nature of children's alternative understandings2 and, for present purposes, one example (in this case, children's understanding of electricity) is perhaps sufficient to give a flavour of the variety of understandings that is possible within a class.

Electricity is a topic that abounds with all kinds of theoretical terms: current, voltage, energy, power etc. Many students have difficulty differentiat-

ing among them, and frequently use them as synonyms. Many also have

compounding and findings, the and procedure the activity, the of pose pur- the misunderstanding activity laboratory-based entire an through go may students consequence, a As see. to expect they what 'see' they words, other In to. rise give theories existing their expectations the with conform to observations their modify or adjust will children frequently, More views. existing their with conflicts that evidence observational denying vehemently even sometimes interpretations, wrong or different make and way, wrong or different a in place, (wrong?) different a in look may they teacher, the by assumed that from framework theoretical different a have children When damaging. more considerably and complex more much be can situation the practice, in that, appreciated readily be can it discussion, foregoing the mind in Bearing unproductive. be will activity the of much Consequently, see. they what interpret to how or hand, in task the to appropriate observations make to order in look, to how or look, to where know not will work frame- theoretical a lack who students that asserted been already has It bulb. lighted a by consumed is current electric that views dents' stu- change to failed even have ammeters with demonstrations conclusive Supposedly absurd. as views scientists' resist strenuously often they that but teaching), to exposure after (even views scientists' than other views have children many do only not that noted be also should It changes. explained situation-to-be- the as models change may children that is 5, Chapter in ing understand- of frameworks personal on discussion the to relates and interesting, particularly is What sharply. declining then and 15, age at peak a to rising C model and popularity in increasing steadily D model with time, over changes views four these of prevalence The circuit. the around uniform is and only direction one in is current that states view) scientists' (the D Model smaller. is wire' 'return the in current the bulb, the lighting in up' 'used been has some because but C, model in only direction one in flows Current bulb'. the in clash currents 'the explained: 11-year-old one As other. the in electricity negative direction, one in electricity positive — wires both through bulb the to flows current B, model In needed. is wire one only returns, current no Since bulb. the to cell the of terminal upper the from flows current A, model In circuits. electric explaining in models four of one to subscribe students year-old 8—12- that showed 1985) Freyberg and (Osborne Zealand New in search Re- time.' of course the in appliances electric by consumed be will battery a in contained current the current electric of amount certain [and] a stored is battery new every 'in statements: the with agreed course, physics introductory an completed recently had who 13—15-year-olds, of sample' large very 'a of cent per 85 about that showing study German a quotes 35) (1985: Shipstone motors. and bulbs in up used and cells in stored is that current is it that believe to come often students electricity, of teaching early the of much in current electric on emphasis considerable is there Because unclear. is up' 'used is what first, At up. used is it where example), for motor, or lamp (a consumer-device a to cell) (the source a from electricity of flow one-way a is teaching, after persists also and teaching, before common very is that idea An circuits. electric of nature the understanding difficulty .

.

.

.

.

.

27 • learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

28 •

Teaching and learning science

whatever misconceptions they brought with them to the task. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that, because predictions, perceptions and explanations are all strongly influenced by prior conceptual understanding, students who hold different frameworks of meaning conduct different investigations, with correspondingly different learning outcomes. The alternative conceptions research literature provides many such examples.

Where do children's ideas come from? As George Kelly (1955) says, we are all searching for personal meanings that enable us to make sense of the world and to establish a measure of control. Since we cannot know reality directly, we have to construct theories about it. Man looks at his world through transparent patterns or templets which he creates and then attempts to fit over the realities of which the world is composed. The fit is not always very good. Yet without such patterns

the world appears to be such an undifferentiated homogeneity that man is unable to make any sense out of it. Even a poor fit is more helpful to him than nothing at all. (Kelly 1955: 8)

Students have been engaged in this process since long before they come to school science lessons. Consequently, they may already have ideas and theories about many of the things that we attempt to teach them in the science curriculum. They form their ideas and beliefs in response to everyday experiences, including the kinds of contrived experiences that we provide in school, through talking with others, through interaction with the media (particularly television) and through visits to zoos, museums and recreational areas. In all these interactions, language is the key mediator. Many words (like force, energy, plant, animal and cell) have meanings in science that differ from or are specialized refinements of their common everyday usage. It would be surprising, therefore, if everyday language use did not influence children's understanding of what these terms mean, sometimes in contradiction of the meanings emphasized in science lessons. Bell's (1981) work on children's understanding of the term animal illustrates very clearly how persistent everyday meanings can be: 78 per cent of 11-yearolds and 35 per cent of primary teacher trainees did not classify a spider as an animal. It seems that, in common with everyday usage, 'animals' are relatively large, have four legs, live on land and probably have fur or hair. A common turn of phrase or everyday expression can play a significant role in children's theory building about phenomena. For example, simple

everyday usage attributes an active role to the eye (we 'look daggers' at people, our eyes 'flash', we 'look for things', and sometimes it is as though 'looks could kill'); it assigns a passive role to the object that is seen, 'looked at' or apprehended. Not surprisingly, young children have views about vision

been and seen not have who schools Western in children few are there too; role, prominent a play may industry entertainment The 'living'. is fire that asserted children Zealand New of study (1980) Stead's in interviewed olds 12-year- of cent per 50 almost that finding curious the for responsible partly be may fires' gas slogan marketing the and advertised, are heaters gas natural and bars chocolate which in ways the with parallels striking numerous are there energy, of understanding children's of study (1989) Kirkwood's In advertising. of forms seductive the in presented when espedally misunderstanding, building for potential its however, forget, not should We understanding. scientific develop and promote to teachers by used be can activities language-based which in ways the of some examines 13 Chapter education. science of essence the as identified is practice scientific and discourse ific scient- into enculturation where chapters, later in examined is conflict This discourse. lay use to and meanings everyday access to capacity student's a extinguish to us led scientists of community the within employed ication commun- of styles and forms of use the promote to and meanings scientific proper establish to desire our if absurd be would It preparation. professional pre- as education science and citizenship responsible for education science between conflict potential the is here relevance particular Of designers. curriculum many eludes that one be to seems it idea, novel a be not may this While education. science of goals overall the by determined be should curriculum school the in sophistication theoretical of level the that follows It view.3 sophisticated more a employ to need no is there successfully, out carried be to task the enable will sophistication of level low a at structure theoretical a If accomplished. be to have that tasks the to relation direct in is group or individual particular a by employed theory a of sophistication of level the that earlier: made point the is illustrating is Nickerson What 352) 1986: (Nickerson requires. world day-to-day our in survival that decisions of kinds the make to us permit to accurate sufficiently deficiencies, their of spite in are, reality physical of models our part, most the for words, other In world. day-to-day the in risk great at us put to as wrong so not are they part most the For physicist. the of view of point the from wrong patently respects, many in and, conceived ill undoubtedly are heads our in carry us of most that physics of theories or The basis. day-by-day a on adequately function to us enabling of capable fectly per- is it view, of point scientific a from correct not certainly is knowledge this While 1989). (Hills sense common plain just or 1992) (Furnham ence sci- lay termed have some what produces that use language common and experience everyday between interaction of kind this is It 1985). (Guesne us dazzle would that because eye, the enters light that accept to reluctant are they but see, to order in light need we that acknowledge Children bat's a like rather — back bounces and object the hits eye, the from comes something use: language of kind this with consistent are that .

.

29 • learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

30 • Teaching and learning science

influenced by the 'science' in TV shows such as Star Trek, Dr Who and The XFiles, and movies such as the Star Wars series, Jurassic Park and Contact (see

Gough (1993) for an account of how science fiction might be used advantageously in the curriculum). Children's everyday conversation is littered with scientific and pseudo-scientific terms; the teacher's job is to help students

to use this vocabulary critically and appropriately, while enriching it with a more scientifically useful one. Common everyday experience is, of course, another major stimulus to theory building, and it is this influence that no doubt explains the often striking parallels between children's views in science and the theories held by scientists in previous centuries.4 It also explains both the similarities and some of the differences revealed in cross-cultural studies. For example, experience tells us that objects only move when you apply a force to them. As soon as you stop pushing or pulling, the object stays at rest. Consequently, 'at rest' means no force acting. Everyday experience also 'tells us' that heavy objects fall faster than light ones, the Sun moves across the sky (and, therefore, around the Earth), when you burn something there is less afterwards than there was before and electricity gets used up in lighting a bulb (which is why batteries run down). Some of the scientific theories we expect children to learn are counter-intuitive and often flatly contradict these cornmonsense views. They are also sometimes pitched at a level of abstraction that can be problematic for young children. It is difficult for them to understand the existence of something which has no immediate physical manifestations. Consequently, substances dissolving or evaporating are regarded by young children as having disappeared. Even some 15- and 16-year-olds will say that when water is boiled it first gives steam (which you can see, of course)

and then splits into its component gases, hydrogen and oxygen, which are invisible (Osborne and Cosgrove 1983). The notion that light is all around us, not just coming from a torch or other light source, is also a strange and uncomfortable one for many children. Consequently, when teachers identify real world examples of scientific principles they may sometimes be reinfordng students' misconceptions. There may be occasions when it is more politic to leave the citing of real world examples until the abstract concept is better established. It is not uncommon for children to attribute a physical reality or objective existence to physical sensations such as cold. For them, coldness is something that comes into the house from outside, through windows and doors.

We wear bulky clothes in winter to 'keep out the cold'. Sometimes these entities are animized or anthropomorphized, so that cold tries to squeeze in through the cracks and heat forces the air out of things. As a personal aside, I must say that, having experienced several Canadian winters, I now have much sympathy with views that portray 'cold' as an essentially malignant entity. Watts and Bentley (1994) point out that there is an implicit anthropomorphism in the very language of science: light interferes, electrons become excited, poor conductors resist, magnetic poles attract and repel and so on. And, on occasions, teachers encourage it: students are told that alkali metals want

basis the on rejected or selected be even may observations activities, based laboratory- In on. so and questions test answer and interpret they how work, experimental own their designing in control to important consider they variables the text, from extract they meaning the own, their of investigations laboratory or demonstrations teacher from results interpret they which in way the ask, they questions the influence will hold students that views The

learning of theory personalized more a Towards learning. on influence significant very a be can identity cultural that follows it asserts, literature this as arise, they which in cultures the of wisdom cumulative and insights experiences, priorities, lems, prob- the reflect (theories) structures conceptual If 1996). McLellan 1993; Hennessy 1988; (Lave deployed are they which in contexts the to unique are that strategies problem-solving alternative and frameworks explanatory alternative developing communities specialized of examples with abounds cognition situated of literature The Tobago. and Trinidad to common ence') scicall they (which beliefs folk the of study their in show (1988) Glasgow and George as ways, different significantly in matters rationalize and conceptualize they But care. child and health food, as such science, by addressed problems and issues of kinds same the with deal notions these of Many lightning. the attract longer no could cutlery as such objects metal that so storm, electrical an during drapes) the (close curtains the draw to practice common once was it example, For tales. wives' old called we times, correct politically less in what, and wisdom folk superstitions, to rise giving groups, social particular within common in held sometimes are planations ex- and theories alternative and understanding conceptual Alternative 1985). a!. et Cho 1984; (Barrass textbooks or teachers by on passed errors to attributable directly are misunderstandings dent sturare) when be to (hoped cases those are there course, of And, bonds'. rich of breaking the of terms in system ADP—ATP the in energy of release the for accounting teachers biology of case the in as students, for lems prob- learning cause also can teachers science by use language careless that is point similar essentially An electron. an remove to required energy the is, that — energies ionization of consideration a to proceed then and electrons lose to wanting elements about talk to chemists for counterproductive be can it example, For understanding. scientific good to counter runs metaphor morphic anthropo- the of language the when problems serious more even be can There phenomena. of understanding personal their into such as them incorporate and explanations as accounts these accept to led be may them of some similes, and metaphors using are we that students to clear it make don't we If problems. real very some be can there but quality, personal graphic a things giving by understanding assist may anthropomorphism and animism which in situations are There on. so and resistance least of path the chooses current electric an one, gain to want halogens while electron, an lose to 31 •

learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

32 • Teaching and learning science

of whether they 'fit' with students' expectations, and explanations proffered by teachers may be rejected because they conflict with students' firmly held commonsense views. An impressive body of research findings of this kind has been amassed during the past decade and a half, and points to the need to develop an approach to the teaching and learning of science that takes account of students' existing views and the ways in which they interact with and are modified by experience.

There are a number of key elements in such a view of learning. First, learners are not passive recipients of knowledge; rather, they are active constructors and reconstructors of their own understanding. Mental representations are continually being confirmed, rejected, adapted, reformed or developed in response to experiences, both inside and outside school. Second, learning depends as much on what the learner brings to the task as it does on what the teacher builds into it. In other words, students relate new observations, activities and text-based information to what they already know, and so generate new meanings. The way students engage in classroom activities and how they interpret events and experiences are shaped by prior ideas, though not entirely determined by them. Clearly, students change their views, on occasions, in response to what they experience and their attempts to make sense of it. Otherwise, no new learning would ever occur. However, there are also occasions when students' views are uninfluenced or are influenced in unanticipated ways by the teaching they experience (Osborne eta!. 1983). Third, the restructuring that constitutes learning is a continuing process; there never comes a point at which we stop learning. Moreover, learning is a purposeful activity. Although we can seemingly learn 'by accident', the restructuring process entails an evaluation and judgement phase and a commitment to accept the new or modified view. In the absence of this commitment, a new idea will be rejected. The internal reflection and decision-making stage, swift and tacit as it may often be, is a key to designing more successful learning opportunities in class. It should be emphasized that the word 'opportunities' is not used carelessly here; it carries with it an implication of student responsibility for learning that is explored further in Chapter 6. These elements of a theory of learning, which are often clustered under the umbrella term 'constructivist views of learning', are well summarized by Shuell (1990: 540): Meaningful cognitive learning is an active, constructive, and cumulative process that occurs gradually over a period of time. It is a goal oriented process best characterized in terms of problem solving. Learning is not merely an additive process — qualitative, as well as quantitative, changes occur, and qualitative differences are evident in both the substance of what is being learned and in the learning processes most appropriate for acquiring additional knowledge.

Strong parallels are evident between constructivist views of learning as conceptual change brought about through encounters with experience and Piagetian notions of assimilation and accommodation. However, constructivism

theories. scientific of coherence conceptual the lack often ideas their science, of history the in ideas past resemble do often phenomena everyday common of explanations children's although that noted be should It 4 precision. pragmatic as pose pur- for sophistication sufficient of principle this to refer (1987) Pea and Hawkins 3 bibliographies. extensive provide also (1994) Duit and Pfundt and (1992) Cheek 1994a). (1985, etal. Driver (1983), Watts and Gilbert (1983), Erickson and Driver literature: research extensive the to access ready provide books and articles review of number A 2 context. to related is opposition' 'strenuous my that apparent become also will It 1

Notes theory. Piagetian of operations and structures formal global, more the than learning of view domain-specific more a takes 33 •

learning and science in knowledge prior of significance The

•..4 Constructivist approaches

to teaching and learning science

A constructivist theory of learning does not necessarily entail a constructivof ist approach to teaching. As Millar (1989: 589) points out, the eliciting, clarification, and construction of new ideas takes place internally, within the learner's own head. This occurs whenever any successful learning takes place and is independent of the form of instruction.' Nevertheless,

the ideas outlined in Chapter 3 provide some useful pointers to teaching strategies that might assist students in the task of conceptual reconstruction. They suggest, for example, that the most powerful stimulus for the extension, modification or rejection of a particular idea is its failure to cope with circumstances encountered. Consequently, teachers can initiate or stimulate learning by setting demanding tasks, issuing challenges or presenting counter experiences. However, because learning is a process of personal development, it is important that each learner is given and accepts a degree of responsibility for her or his own learning. Students need to explore their own ideas and understanding, to make choices among them, to justify and test different ideas and to evaluate them for themselves, in both familiar and unfamiliar situations.

A number of constructivist approaches to science teaching have been developed (Cosgrove et al. 1982; Biddulph and Osborne 1984; Driver 1989; Harlen 1992; Appleton 1993). While they differ a little in detail, they can be usefully summarized as follows:

• identify students' ideas and views;

• create opportunities for students to explore their ideas and test their robustness in explaining phenomena, accounting for events and making predictions;

• provide stimuli for students to develop, modify and, where necessary, change their ideas and views; • support their attempts to rethink and reconstruct their ideas and views.

is that form a into them converting in practice extensive need They tion. ques- 'why' simple a of form the in often are and seeking', answer 'correct as characterized best are children young by asked questions the of Many question. productive or good a constitutes what know students that ensure to have we and welcomed are questions that show to have we dimensions: cognitive and affective both are there Thus, investigation). supports that form a in are they is, (that form operational in expressed are questions that ensuring second, questions; scientific ask to attempts their in supported and questions ask to stimulated be will children which within climate classroom a creating first, teachers: for attention of focuses two creates approach This 1995). Alsop and Watts 1988; Cosgrove and Faire 1984; Osborne and (Bidduiph inquiry further for stimulus a as questions own their pose to encouraged be might students activities, these Throughout events'. of 'recollections or knowledge' 'episodic up building as to refers 1996) (1991, White and phenomena' for feel a 'getting call (1985) Allsop and Woolnough what is This experience. sonal per- of stock student's a up build to order in experiences practical further provide to necessary be will it circumstances, these In experience. everyday common to open are lessons science in studied matters all Not views. prior any formed have not will so and experiences prior no have may students which concerning events and phenomena topics, are there course, Of ways. administered, easily more other, in explicit ideas their make to unable been have may reasons, of variety a for who, students specific with use for reserve in keep can teachers that method a is it Nevertheless, doubtful. is manage to required are teachers many that size the of classes for approach an such of ticality prac- the Sadly, Project). Science in Learning Waikato's of University the by developed methods (the interviews-about-events and views-about-instances inter- individual use teachers that suggest even (1997) Scaife and Abdullah and (1988) Gunstone Indeed, tactics. teaching as used be can understanding students' elicit to used methods research the of any effect, In diagrams. Vee and maps concept diagrams, Venn using and charts flow drawing headings, sub- and headings self-generated with notes making diagrams, structing con- include methods written Other questions. and reactions ideas, their record to which in diaries learning individual keep students that suggests (1989) Fensham kinds. various of activities writing and discussion group work, art of use questioning, teacher skilful including means, of variety a by elicited be can interpretations and responses Students' kind. some of activity outdoor/field or laboratory-based a in students involving or video a ing show- demonstration, a conducting problem, a stating question, a posing by topic a begin might teacher a thought, for focus initial an provide To ment. experi- and/or observation by robustness their test and scrutiny critical to them subject others, with them share explicit, ideas own their make to dents stu- for opportunities creating involve generally approaches Constructivist

ideas students' exploring and Acknowledging 35 •

science learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

36 •

Teaching and learning science

likely to stimulate a scientific inquiry. Indeed, some fairly explicit teaching, during which different kinds of questions and their functions are defined, described and modelled, may be required in the early stages. Encouraging students to use words such as which, where, when or what if instead of why, is an early step in this direction. As many opportunities as possible should be taken for stimulating children to ask operational questions. Watching a demonstration, reading an article, listening to a speaker, viewing a video and so on are all valuable opportunities for students to formulate questions, as

well as for taking notes and answering the teachers' questions. As a first step, Elstgeest (1985) suggests that teachers classify their own questions into ?); measuring five categories: attention-focusing (What do you notice and counting (How many ... ? or How long ... ?); making comparisons ?); (What are the differences . ?); prompting action (What happens if and problem-posing (Can you find a way to ... ?). But teachers need to do more than just ask these kinds of questions; they also need to describe them (and their purposes) and encourage students to ask them. Because students often ask questions that teachers wouldn't usually ask, question sessions can play a crucial role in gaining student involvement and developing the sense of ownership essential to building intellectual independ.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

ence. Moreover, when teachers are working alongside students in trying to answer everyone's questions, they are cast in the role of learner, another element contributing to students' self-esteem and intellectual independence. While the child-centred thrust of constructivism might incline teachers towards encouraging students to explore phenomena and events individually, and to

design and conduct their own investigations with the minimum of teacher direction, there is also enormous value in all students attending to the same phenomena and events in order to generate a wider range of ideas from which to begin to criticize and challenge.

Presenting challenges for restructuring ideas Through further laboratory activities, role play, games and simulations, talk-

ing, reading and writing, students continue to explore their own understanding and begin to gain an appreciation of the views and understanding of others. Through various group activities, students learn to acknowledge and criticize the views of others, accept and value criticism and recognize discrepandes, conflicts, contradictions and inconsistencies, as well as points of similarity and agreement. In teaching the particle model of gases to seventh

grade classes, for example, Nussbaum and Novick (1982) implemented a strategy based on individual drawings, which were subsequently made 'public' within the class. Students drew the conditions they believed pertained in a flask before and after the use of a vacuum pump. After moving around the classroom, the teacher asked students associated with each type of drawing to reproduce their sketches on the blackboard and to give reasons for their

reconciliation'. 'integrative call (1978) a!. et Ausubel what or ing, restructur- cognitive by achieved is which of resolution the disequilibrium', 'cognitive calls Piaget what precipitates experiences new with ideas existing of 'collision' the that assumed further is It change. conceptual to stimulus a and factor motivating a both as act phenomenon or event new the explain to ideas existing of inadequacy the by occasioned curiosity or uneasiness puzzlement, surprise, of feelings that assumed is it approaches, these both In confronted. be can prediction and observation between discrepancies any and observe, they what record students demonstration, teacher subsequent the During situations. certain in happen will what for reasons, with prediction, written a provide to asked are students tasks, (PEOE) explain—observe—explain predict— as described better perhaps are which (1988), a!. et Gunstone by developed tasks (POE) predict—observe—explain the in Alternatively, standing. under- initial their refute or confirm observations new these how explain then and teacher the by presented event discrepant a observe predictions, make to understanding their use concept, a of understanding their describe might students example, For 1988). Kass and Fensham 1984; Hewson and (Hewson kinds various of experiences hands-on through events discrepant or surprising with them present deliberately may or views their of limitations the find to students challenge may Teachers test. experimental and tional observa- to them subject to is, that — evidence external to respect with ness robust- their test to opportunity an be may there presented, been have that views different the criticizing and contrasting comparing, to addition In so. done already have students some course, of unless, — learning appropriate as curriculum the by identified ideas the introduce might teacher the that stage this at is It it. oppose to required being by others of views the of appreciation keener a gain and it, defend to required are they as position their of understanding clearer a to come Students controversies. generating of intention specific the with views personal their share students which in strategy', confrontation 'ideational the describe (1985) eta!. Champagne view. scientific accepted the to closest one the or productive most the always not is view held widely most the that recognize to students helps strategy this evidence, experimental and vational obser- to relation in explanations particular of robustness the evaluate and viewpoints different contrasting and comparing of skills the learn ferently, dif- things see may others that aware become views, own their articulate to students assisting with associated benefits the to addition In clarified. be to distinction crucial this for opportunity an provides which explanation, an than rather description further a providing students in results often strategy this that comments Shapiro popularity.' by ordered rank and chart public a on recorded are phenomenon a of explanations student-generated ferent dif- 1994), (1988, Shapiro by devised strategy profile' 'classroom the In activities. group during produced pictures trasting con- and comparing involving sequence teaching similar a describes (1989) Driver purposes. criticism and discussion for drawings the of copies with provided was student each lesson, subsequent a In representation. particular 37 • science

learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

38 •

Teaching and learning science

A necessary condition for cognitive restructuring is an opportunity for repeated, exploratory, inquiry-oriented behaviors about an event or phenomena in order to realize that the intact schema option is no longer tenable, and that the only reasonable option is to revise one's cognitive structure so as to be more consistent with one's experience (data, measurements, or observations). (Saunders 1992: 138)

Resistance to restructuring Despite Saunders's optimism that the reasonable option' is to restructure one's cognitive schema, many students don't take it! Research shows that restructuring does not readily or easily occur. Existing ideas are often strongly resistant to change (di Sessa 1982; Eylon and Linn 1988). If an idea

has served its purposes well in the past, there will be little urgency to replace it. Instead of replacing their views, students may retain them by denying the new data, or reworking the data in a way that is consistent with their existing views (Gunstone and White 1981; Nussbaum 1985). Another strategy is to distort the new idea until it can be regarded as compatible with the old (Chinn and Brewer 1993). Many individuals exhibit a

tion bias' and look for evidence to confirm rather than disconfirm their ideas (Hashweh 1986). In such circumstances, the existing notion is likely to

prevail. This probability is heightened when students are responsible for designing the inquiry: they will only subject to critical scrutiny those aspects of their understanding which they have reason to doubt. More importantly, in designing an experiment, they can test only those variables they believe to be involved. Put simply, it isn't possible to generate data about something of which one is unaware.

Variations in personality traits make some students more open to new ideas than others. Some students may simply disengage from the struggle to resolve cognitive disequilibrium. Rather than accepting responsibility for understanding the nature of the discrepancy and for rationalizing it, they may simply declare that the matter is not worth bothering about, of no interest whatsoever, and irrelevant to their needs — in effect saying, 'I may not understand, but I don't care.' Some may be reluctant to consider alternatives through fear of change, uncertainty and unfamiliarity. Furthermore, students may be much more tolerant of inconsistencies than Saunders anticipates. As Claxton (1991: 86) points out, there is often very little consistency

and coherence in a student's thinking about phenomena: Far from being the neat, coherent unitary sort of theory to which science proper aspires, the mind-scape of the child is patchwork and piecemeal. It consists not of a single integrated theory but of an assembly of each generated to provide successful engagement with a particular kind of scenario.

necessitates strategy a Such adjustment'. by direction desired the in conflict the resolve to strives teacher the text, or experience observation, new the and understanding existing between conflict promoted Having one. new the of status the raise and idea existing the of status the lower to is task teacher's the simply, Put fruitfulness. and plausibility intelligibility, of ditions con- three the meet they which to extent the changing of is, that — conceptions rival of status the changing of matter a as science learning and teaching to approach change conceptual the describe (1989) Thorley and Hewson ibility. plaus- and intelligibility of conditions the satisfactorily meet to alternatives, vigorous with confronted when failure, its in located be also may It fruitful). longer no is it (i.e. context restricted previous its beyond events control to or correctly predict to failure its in reside may idea existing an with satisfaction Dis- them. replace to need the recognize and views current their of tions limita- the understand students when possible made is change Conceptual 6).2 Chapter see (but tests in marks gaining of sense the in fruitful be also could It study. and investigation for areas new suggesting and world) the of sense (making insight new providing or predictions reliable and valid making problems, solving by learner, the to value of something provide to capacity the have should it is, that — fruitful become will it that seem or (useful) fruitful be must It terms. commonsense in is it what from different rather be may terms sdentific in sense' though sense, make should and believable be should it terms, simple In understanding. student's the of aspects other with reconciled be to able be and with consistent be should it is, that — (reasonable) plausible be must It consistent. internally and coherent be should it that concerned are scientists that cognizant be should student the Additionally, used. be should and can it how and means it what stand under- must learner the is, that — (understandable) intelligible be must It

•

•

•

conditions. certain meet must idea new the ance, accept- gain To it. replace to which with idea better or new a to access have and belief/understanding current their with dissatisfied are learners if only accepted be will scheme conceptual new a that argue (1982) al. et Posner

restructuring conceptual for conditions The overwhelmed. be may students and much, too change; for stimulus no is there and little, Too discrepancy. of extent and form right the exactly provide to endeavour must strategy this uses who teacher the fore, There- it. resolve to attempt they will it, about concerned sufficiently are and conflict, a is there that recognize learners when Only occur. will learning that ensure to sufficient not is it learning, to stimulus necessary a be may ibrium disequil- cognitive while Thus, students. by such as recognized be not may teacher the for event discrepant significant a be may what consequence, a As 39 • science

learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

40 •

Teaching and learning science

that the rival theories/understandings are unambiguously described and satisfactorily discriminated.3 In the absence of these conditions, no meaningful debate is possible and there is no rational basis for choosing. Two points

should be made. First, a student's existing idea may be poorly articulated, incoherent and imprecise, so that no decisive debate is possible. For all kinds of reasons, this is often the case, especially among young children. Second, the very misconception that is supposedly 'under attack' may cause a student to misinterpret the counter examples, thus eliminating the intended cognitive conflict.

It should also be recognized that an individual's ideas are linked in complex and idiosyncratic ways. Concepts are not isolated cognitive artefacts; they have syntactical and semantic relationships to other concepts. They are not just related, they are interrelated: they depend on each other for meaning. Hence, changing one idea may entail changing, modifying or rearranging others. It takes time; it is uncertain. It is unlikely that a concept will be readily changed if it is embedded in a set of relationships that is otherwise sound (in terms of intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness). It is also likely that a single example of a discrepant event or cognitive conflict may be identified by students as no more than a 'rogue case', a special exception for which an ad hoc explanation can be used while the rest of the complex of ideas remains unchanged. Hence, lots of hands-on experiences, group discussions and language activities are necessary to assist students to clarify the nature of conflicts, to test new ideas in a variety of contexts to see how robust, versatile and useful they are, and to ensure that the new idea is fully appreciated and integrated into their view of the world. Rowell eta!. (1990) make a case for a systematic critique of 'old way versus new way of thinking' based on predictive and explanatory capability.

Burbules and Linn (1988) show that even when students do change their views in response to counter experiences, they don't rush to do so. They cling to existing ideas as long as possible. They need time to deal with threatening, disconcerting or confusing data; they need a period for reflection, preferably with teacher guidance and support. These authors also show that individual learners differ quite substantially in their 'learning histories'

and that knock-on effects can cause confusion with ideas that students thought they already had clear in their minds. Interestingly, Hynd et a!. (1994) show that a well designed and carefully used 'refutational text' is often more effective in changing student conceptions than is teacher demonstration, laboratory exercise or group discussion. Moreover, these authors state that when misconceptions are located in commonsense knowledge and everyday experience, peer group discussion may actually consolidate exist-

ing ideas. By contrast, perhaps because of the authority that the written word is perceived to carry, refutational texts that state clearly that particular commonsense views do not explain the phenomena under consideration, and provide a sound argument and good supporting evidence for the scientific view, are often successful. Explicit confrontation of misconceptions through video presentation may also have considerable potential (Muthukrishna et a!.

a than more no be to or away slip to change apparent an for easy too all is 'It say, 579) (1989: Gunstone and White As maintained. be not may occurred has development conceptual whatever reflection, such Without related. are ideas how of understanding an gaining in students assist that activities are form written and oral in others to ideas presenting and view of points debating and arguing logs, learning keeping views, after and before Comparing

•

•

made. be should points Three ing.' teach- interactive of part central a is others, of ideas the and ideas previous their with compare findings their how on and them reached they how on findings, their on reflect to children 'Encouraging say: 26) (1988: Cosgrove and Faire example, For place. taken have that understanding of changes the on reflection or review of phase a include approaches constructivist Many

progress Reviewing knowledge. scientific consensual public, of body specific a acquire to students expect we time, same the at yet, school; outside and inside both experiences and observations their and others of views the to, rise give they expectations the ideas, ing exist- their among and between disparities any themselves for reconcile to attempt learners individual which in process, personal a as recognized is science learning problem: major a lies Herein macrotheories. community's science the to minitheories children's from transition a with, concerned is science that understandings universalistic abstract, more the towards possess already students particular that understanding context-specific personalized, the from move to course, of is, strategies these of purpose overall The 700). 1995: Taylor and (Baker views' world non-Western students' of integrity the devaluing by imperialism cultural Western of agent an 'as serve might displacement cognitive of forms assertive that argued be could it ation, situ- cross-cultural or multi-ethnic a In well.' reasonably them serving is, and been, has that self of part a abandon and confront to forced are students which in assault" "cognitive of kind 'a be can (1985), Clark says result, The students. for dissatisfaction create to teacher the require strategies conflict Cognitive control. in is who of matter the also is There insult'. personal and feelings injured of possibility the with classroom, contentious a to 'lead will conflict cognitive of use extensive whether ask 6) (1989: Thompsen and Howe loses. someone) (or something and wins someone) (or something ing, learn- in even that, message: curriculum hidden the of cognizant be should events discrepant and conflict cognitive of use extensive making Teachers physics). Newtonian of aspect restricted fairly a concerned study al. et Hynd (the science of areas other in research more much for need a is there clearly but considered, be can research this which from perspectives additional provide 13 and 12 Chapters 1993). 41 • science

learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

42 •

Teaching and learning science

shallow, casual adoption of a principle without real belief in it or commitment to it.' • Reflecting on their own learning helps students to appreciate that conceptual change is involved in learning. It is not just a case of remembering or of 'being clever'; one can learn how to learn.

Gunstone (1994) sees reflection and metacognition as the key to meeting Posner et al.'s (1982) conditions for conceptual change because the learner has to recognize his or her existing ideas and views, evaluate them in terms of what is being presented as an alternative and then decide whether or not to reconstruct or change existing understanding. Through metacognitive activities, and the increased awareness and understanding of their own learning processes that results, students gain more control over their learning. In other words, knowledge of cognition can translate into regulation of cognition.4 By learning how to monitor and reflect on their own processes of conceptual change, students are encouraged and enabled to become responsible for their own learning, and may become sufficiently aware of their own learning habits and characteristic patterns that they can identify and correct their own errors as they proceed (an idea developed in Chapter 6). As Osborne and Wittrock (1985: 66) maintain: 'When students accept that they, rather than their teachers, their parents, other people, or other factors, are primarily responsible for constructing the meanings that represent their success or failure in school, their learning is likely to increase.' There are a variety of strategies available to the teacher for helping students to develop an understanding of how to monitor their own learning. For example, they can provide checklists of questions which encourage

students to consider and comment on their understanding and how it is changing during a particular curriculum activity: 'What do I know about this topic?'; 'Do I understand this idea as well as I would like?'; 'How does this idea compare with what I used to think?'; and so on (Baird 1986; Hewson and Thorley 1989). A variation of this approach is for student and teacher to share in the upkeep of an interactive learning/thinking log, each taking time to comment on the entries of the other. The aim is to compile an ongoing critical dialogue about the relative status of ideas in terms of intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness. Teachers might ask, for example: 'What do you find difficult about this idea?', 'Could you use this idea to

explain the data from experiment X?', 'Is this idea useful in solving the problem posed earlier?' What I am arguing here is that we introduce students to Posner et al's (1982) conditions for conceptual change — that is, consciously encourage them to weigh the merits of rival ideas in terms of intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness. Shapiro (1988) suggests that students read stories and view tapes of other students using learning strategies found to be effective in the science class-

room; Novak (1990) has written at length on the use of concept maps and Vee diagrams; Paris et a!. (1984, 1986) have recommended an explicit programme of 'informed strategies for learning', involving direct instruction in

kinds. all of learning in factor decisive a as times of number a cited is and book, this in theme recurring a is Metacognition 4 1996). Stofflett and (Thorley exemplars and metaphors analogies, of use attributes, criterial on emphasis expressions, linguistic through them enhance to methods of repertoire a and context) scientific a (in mean terms these what of understanding clear a have teachers that requires also It 3 science). of aesthetics (the economy and parsimony elegance, of terms in interpreted be also might fruitfulness itself, science of perspective the From 2 climate'. 'classroom prevailing the on us, reminds Shapiro depend, should included are students of names the Whether

1

Notes thought. reflective for stimulus powerful a providing thereby undergone, changes of recollections reinforce and occurred have that changes conceptual of evidence tangible include portfolios Student metalearning. for resource valuable a provides and tasks learning authentic more in engagement for opportunities creates assessment portfolio-based that noting worth is It practices. evaluation and assessment for implications has this Clearly, tion. motiva- alternative powerful very is there unless — methods familiar existing, with continue will students system, school the from pay-off immediate no is there if Second, success). recognizes school the terms whatever (in cessful suc- are strategies current their if especially learning, of views their change to unwilling often are students First, problems. further two are There 1989). Gunstone and (White methods in variation frequent is needed is what Clearly, 1994). Mitchell and (White activities reflective supposedly for algorithms following then and devising by behaviour learning good fake can students that evidence also is There routine. becomes method any almost while, a After motivation. personal their maintain or students by action reflective sustain will technique one no that found 1992) Northfield and Baird 1986; Mitchell and (Baird (PEEL) ing Learn- Effective Enhance to Project the in involved teachers Significantly, on. so and topic; a on test a setting text; scrambled reordering activities; solving problem- from instructions unnecessary or text from data surplus deleting notes; teacher-produced and text for sub-headings appropriate devising employed: usefully be can books skills study in found be to processing tion informa- good encourage to techniques the of Many criticism. and discussion group peer via feedback immediate and practice frequent strategies, learning 43 • science

learning and teaching to approaches Constructivist

The paradox of constructivism

Among others, Matthews (1993a, 1994, 1997) has argued that in its pursuit

of personal understanding of phenomena and events, the constructivist approach is open to the charge of neglecting and trivializing scientific under-

standing. In a vigorous and highly publicized attack on the constructivist base of the New Zealand science curriculum,1 he described constructivism as

a 'loony doctrine' which is leading New Zealand into an educational and scientific abyss. At the heart of his criticism is a concern that constructivist approaches imply that students who construct their own understanding of the world are also constructing scientific understanding. Anything is allowed to count as science, he says, because the criteria of scientific truth and the explicit teaching of established scientific knowledge are disregarded in favour of 'ensuring equity for all students, creating a friendly learning environment, listening to students, ensuring students communicate, challenging sensitively the ideas of students and providing resources' (Matthews 1993b). Absurdly, some constructivist writers assert that everyone is a scientist,

even children. In New Zealand, as Matthews points out, the Ministry of Education states that 'we are all scientists' (Ministry of Education 1989: 5), and science is described as 'an activity that can be carried out by all people as part of their everyday life' (Ministry of Education 1992: 8).2 Similarly, Raper and Stringer (1987: 26) assert that 'thinking scientifically comes naturally to children'. Nothing could be further from the truth. Not all investigations and inquiries are scientific and not all knowledge and explanations resulting from them are equally valid from a scientific point of view. Some ideas have more scientific credibility, validity and reliability than others precisely because the inquiries that produced them adhere to well established criteria for judging and evaluating knowledge claims and to rigorous standards for conducting and appraising scientific investigations. These standards and criteria have to be learned; they are not natural, commonsense and child-like. A view that a child has, for reasons that satisfy him or her, is not necessarily good science. Scientific knowledge is more than personally held belief

out points He truth. scientific of disregarding the for and science as accepted be to views any for open door the leaves this that is concern His involved. were people different if otherwise be would presumably and otherwise; be therefore, could, and construct human a than more no is knowledge ific scient- that believe necessarily they sense absolute an in reality know cannot science that acknowledge constructivists because that assertion his is ivists construct- at levels (1994) Matthews that relativism of charge the to Central

critics its and constructivism Radical

discussion). later (see contexts social other to relate they how and serve, may standing under- and knowledge purposes other what of account take to need also we However, other. any than better is curriculum no and suffice, will content curriculum any knowledge, of 'quality' the regarding position relativist the take we If others? than useful or desirable more are understanding of ways some that notion the to commitment a have don't we if curricula effective and good design to struggle Why all. at science teach to even or ricula, cur- good design to incentive no ourselves give we views; their develop or change to incentive no students our give We disservice. gross a students do we whatever), or useful more views, other with consistent more coherent, more general, more accurate, more being of sense the (in others than better as ideas some judge to unwilling are we if views, students' evaluate to ing unwill- are we if However, located. are students which in contexts cultural socio- other in located belief and knowledge denigrate to or self-esteem to damage risk to not and possess, may they understanding inadequate any for students 'blame' to not motivation laudable the from stems wrong, is view particular a that state to or misconception, a as understanding student's a of element any identify to educators science some of reluctance The events. and phenomena about views commonsense everyday students' change or develop to attempting for justification the provides it because education science for essential is it and investigation, and exploration further for impetus the provides it because science for essential is perspective realist This appropriate. and available are tools technical and expertise procedural knowledge, existing whatever using world, real the in events and phenomena about knowledge abstract justifiable rationally is seeks science What undesirable. otherwise are or true, not simply are sense make that beliefs of Lots arbiter. the be to is sense common if views Aristotelian with unfavourably compare Einstein and Newton Galileo, of physics the sense: common of face the in flies knowledge scientific much Indeed, expression. that of meaning everyday the in sense' 'makes it whether of regardless goals), realist has (science universe physical the of nature real the for account and explain to attempt an is It confirmation. observational gathered personally by reinforced 45 •

constructivism of paradox The

46 • Teaching and learning science

that in building his theory of radical constructivism, von Glasersfeld (1989: 122) quotes Ludwik Fleck's claims that the 'content of our knowledge must be considered the free creation of our culture', and that 'every thinking individual, insofar as it is a member of some society, has its own reality according to which and in which it lives.' Passages such as these lay constructivists wide open to charges of relativism, and rightly so. While we may wish to

recognize that different people see the world in different ways, and that much of our knowledge is a product of our social structure, we should reject Fleck's (and, it seems, von Glasersfeld's) view that 'objective reality can be resolved into historical sequences of ideas belonging to the collective' (cited by Matthews 1994: 229). Scientific knowledge is a 'free creation' in the sense that scientists created it (theory building is a creative activity), but it is not free in the sense that it is unrestrained. It is restrained by the nature of the universe (scientific knowledge has to be consistent with observational evidence of real phenomena and events) and it is restrained by the professional practice of scientists and its attendant standards and criteria of acceptability. Were it not so, any knowledge would, indeed, be as good as any other, and it wouldn't matter what we taught in science classes. Most science teachers, including many who would identify strongly with constructivist pedagogy, believe that it matters very much what we teach. Among other things, we teach those ideas in science that we believe best represent our understanding of how the natural world functions. In other words, we teach 'scientific truth' (Chapter 2), or at least a version of it that we consider appropriate to school age students. Scientific knowledge is a human construct, but scientists have confidence in the knowledge they generate because of the distinctive nature of scient-

ific inquiry and the agreed practices of the community of scientists. The personal constructions of individual scientists have to be seen by others to be reasonable, convincing and productive in some way. Otherwise they fail to gain admission to the corpus of scientific knowledge. An individual scientist's claim to knowledge is adjudicated by the scientific community in accordance with strict criteria. Although some scientists may work alone, the products of their inquiries must be recorded and reported in appropriate form and language for critical appraisal by other scientists. Nothing is accepted

into the corpus of scientific knowledge on the authority of a single individual. 'Scientific knowledge' is a status that is accorded to ideas which have been subjected to, and have survived, critical scrutiny by members of the community of scientists, using whatever methods and criteria have been deemed appropriate to ensure the necessary degree of validity and reliability. Of course, the community comprises individuals, too, so its criteria are also human constructs. However, acknowledgement of the social construction of knowledge within the scientific community does not necessitate the view that scientists can legitimate any knowledge they wish or that science is no more than the views of those in power. We should have no greater enthusiasm for the Edinburgh school's so-called 'strong programme' in the sociology of science3 than for von Glasersfeld's radical constructivism.

7) 1994b: al. et (Driver

science. conventional of models and concepts the to also but experiences physical to only not access given be to need Learners inquiry. empirical personal ond bey- go must construction knowledge of process the science, of systems knowledge the to access given be to are learners however, If, learning. discovery as identified been traditionally has what to similar is this then process, individual an as solely seen is construction knowledge If

scientists. of community the of constructions agreed socially the consider to needs education science words, other In crucial. equally are construction particular that for reasons the and constructed is what of nature the learning, of part crucial a is constructing of act the While elements. of number limited a of composed is matter all and information coded through transmitted are characteristics inherited spins, Earth the that notion the at arrive not will students unassisted states, (1996) Osborne As ials. mater- curriculum other or teachers by — presented be to have science of ideas non-commonsense counter-intuitive, The do? they would What start? they would How world. the about ideas new construct can students which by ism mechan- no provides constructivism radical importantly, as Just it'. see you 'how simply is (1982), Hodson by discussed truth' 'scientific of version fied modi- the even Truth, another. than better is idea one why for criteria any provide doesn't constructivism radical Thus, reality. ontological represent to claim no with fiction useful a — device instrumental an merely becomes Theory individual.4 the for works it if viable considered is anything however, Paradoxically, anything. of sure be to unable are we claims it that so do to anxious so is it but truth, absolute to claims avoid to seeks constructivism radical rightly, Quite science. of thrust realist the and knowledge) based consensus- cumulative its (and science of world social specific the groups), social within meaning of construction the (and world social the ignoring is he example, for books, in reside cannot and beings cognizing of minds the in only exists knowledge that asserts he when and reality, ontological of discovery the not world, experiential the of organization personal the serves states (1989) is cognition that Glasersfeld von When and adaptive inquiry. scientific of thrust realist the of abandonment an necessitate not does knowledge scientific of nature constructed socially the recognizing Third, relativist. and unfounded both is science that conclusion the entail not does constructs human fallible and inadequate own our by driven is inquiry scientific that recognizing words, other In unreliable. or untrue necessarily isn't knowledge constructed Personally constructions. our doubt to always need we that follow not does it knowledge, theoretical our via interpreted be to have observations and world, external the of parts real capture not do perceptions inadequate our although Second, admissible. is anything that sense the in construct, personal a merely is it that conclusion the to lead not does subject cognizing a by built actively is knowledge that saying First, making. worth are points Several 47 • constructivism of paradox The

48 • Teaching and learning science

Learning science is not simply a matter of 'making sense of the world' in whatever terms and for whatever reasons satisfy the learner. Learning science involves introduction into the world of concepts, ideas, understandings and theories that scientists have developed and accumulated (that is, what science knows). It is concerned with understanding and being able to use appropriately the meanings developed by the scientific community — notions such as molecule, gene, magnetic field and electron. While these notions relate to

the real world, they are not just copies of it. Science doesn't just describe events and phenomena; rather, it uses mental models and theories to go beyond mere description, in order to explain, interpret and predict. The transition sought by science teachers is from students' commonsense, empirical descriptions of phenomena and events to the abstract, idealized and mathematical descriptions of science. When we teach science we should emphasize that we are not presenting true facts about the world, but theoretical constructions which are subject to further refinement and development, and may eventually be falsified and discarded in favour of better alternatives. Moreover, scientific theory neither creates the objects being studied nor derives from the naive observation of them. Rather, it is an enabling device by means of which we idealize, model and interpret. Recognizing this is central to understanding the distinctive nature of scientific knowledge and, therefore, is a crucial aspect of science education (see Matthews (1994) for an elaboration of these points). Understanding scientific concepts necessitates an appreciation of the role and status of scientific knowledge and its means of production. In the absence

of an awareness of the relationship between hypothesis and evidence, students are unable to distinguish a theory from a simple belief. Without an appreciation of the relationships among theory, observation and experiment, they have no incentive to progress beyond commonsense everyday levels of conceptual understanding. Gil-Perez and Carrascosa-Alis (1994) draw a parallel between the historical development of science, which necessitated a shift away from 'common sense' towards scientific ways of proceeding, and science

education, where conceptual change of the kind demanded by contemporary science curricula can only be effected by a similar kind of methodological change. In other words, learning in science is as much an epistemological issue as it is a cognitive one. In teaching science and teaching about science, and for doing science, the questions 'How do you know?' and 'Why do you

know?' are just as important as 'What do you know?' Students need to learn the criteria by which knowledge claims in science are judged, and they need to know how these compare with knowledge claims and their criteria of validity in other disciplines and in commonsense understanding. These matters are explored further in Chapters 8 to 11. When constructivist teaching strategies concentrate solely on personal understanding, and pay scant attention to methodological and epistemological issues, it is not surprising

that children maintain the 'methodology of superficiality' (Gil-Perez and Carrascosa-Alis 1985) that produced their commonsense understanding in the first place. Common sense is not enough!

judgement a to come and context/situation the of assessment rapid a make to is respond to need the with presented when does us of each What situations. everyday and contexts school in knowledge different deploy students if then, us, surprise shouldn't It problem. everyday an with presented when knowledge of package scientific non- different, entirely an employ may they Moreover, s. and q p, explain to B model and z and y x, explain to A theory using time, the all laminate ists Scient- purposes. different for used are they because inconsistencies are there if matter doesn't It required. is consistency and coherence overall no hence purposes, specific with kits' 'tool as function packages These situation. the to appropriately respond to us help will consider we techniques manipulative or operations of set knowledge, of 'package' or chunk whatever access we problem, or challenge a with presented When contexts. different to priate appro- are that explanation of levels have we laminate: we because tolerated are minitheories among Inconsistencies them. replacing and refining testing, continually are we world, the of experience gain we As us. around world the about 'minitheories' up build all we (1990), Claxton to According compartmentalized. simply are notions conflicting conflict; resolve to need no see may They views. one's change to reason a not is inconsistency then consistency, expect not do children If it. of tolerant be may they do, they if even Second, exists. conflict that recognize not may students First, change. to incentive an as views' 'official and views existing between conflict use to difficult is it consequence, a As context. problem particular the on depending texture, or size in differences on based those to weight in differences on based explanations from shift readily will sinking and floating explain to attempting children young Similarly, circumstances! the on depends it them, For rope. and pulley a using ceiling the to up it hoisted they when energy potential have did but upstairs, it carried they when energy potential had weight a that think not did students which in incident an describe (1986) Bell and Driver them. eliminate to seek will they that guarantee no is there views, students' among inconsistencies out point teachers when Even on. so and examinations assignments, homework class, in questions teachers' by so do to required when science 'official' reproducing and life day every- in science own their using children with coexist, can curriculum's) the and children's (the views two that evidence is There past. the in adequately them served have that views relinquish to reluctant very often are dren chil- simply, Put change. effect to teachers by attempts direct of face the in even persistent, remarkably are but held, strongly only not are events and phenomena everyday about views intuitive and cornrnonsense children's that evidence convincing revealed has half a and decade past the over conducted research earlier, discussed As ideas). of (conflict dissonance cognitive through precipitated be can change conceptual that assertions its in especially ing, learn- of rationality the over-emphasizes but science of rationality the neglects sometimes it that is writing constructivist of paradoxes intriguing the of One

understanding of frameworks Personal 49 • constructivism of paradox The

50 • Teaching and learning science

about the situationally appropriate language, behaviour and theoretical explanation. There is no single, all-purpose right answer. What is appropriate depends on the circumstances: Who is asking the question? Why do they

wish to know? What do they already know? And so on. With regard to children and their science knowledge, much depends on whether the questioner is a teacher (and, moreover, which particular teacher it is), a parent or similarly perceived adult, a friend or another student. This raises all

sorts of interesting questions about the research methods employed by constructivist researchers into children's alternative frameworks of understanding. Which version of their understanding did students give to the researcher? Would different responses be produced by interview, written examination and undirected reflective writing? Different contexts are likely to be perceived differently by students and different responses are likely to be made. The situation is similar to that with the draw-a-scientist test (DAST) (Chambers 1982), where it isn't always clear whether students are consciously portraying a stereotypical scientist (the comic book or movie image) or giving researchers insight into what they really believe. It may even be that older students present a stereotyped picture in order to make a political point — for example, that women have fewer opportunities in science than men, or that certain ethnic groups are excluded from science. At the very least, students have three images of scientists at their disposal: the comic book/movie image, the approved school version and their own view. It isn't always clear which one DAST is accessing (Hodson 1993b). There is abundant research evidence to show that students select different knowledge for different purposes. For example, Galili and Bar (1992) found that students who successfully employed a Newtonian theoretical framework to solve force and motion problems set in a familiar school physics context sometimes reverted to pre-Newtonian reasoning of 'motion implies force' in less familiar contexts. And the literature of situated cognition abounds with examples of children and adults using significantly different knowledge and problem-solving strategies in different circumstances. To date, most science educators have regarded this as a problem, as something to be overcome. Over the course of the next several chapters, I intend to build a case for regarding it as both inevitable and able to be exploited in assisting students to develop a more sophisticated scientific understanding. If it is recognized as normal for individuals to hold more than one explanatory structure, the focus for the science teacher shifts to ways of assisting students to recognize the contexts or circumstances in which a particular conception is appropriate. As discussed previously, science seeks universal explanations (coherent and consistent) when it is acting in its realist mode (that is, when scientists are engaged in theory building), but is tolerant of discrepancies, inconsistencies and even contradictions when acting in its instrumentalist mode (that is, when scientists are merely seeking a measure of predictive control through the use of convenient models). Moreover, a complex and sophisticated scientific theory or conceptual model has several layers of meaning, some of which only become apparent through continued use in practical contexts. It

approved the is Effervescence zinc. with acid hydrochloric dilute of reaction the describe to notebook), 12-year-old's a in saw recently I (as turmoil' frothing seething 'a use to less much 'fizzing', use to not instructed are Students code. linguistic formalized a on insistence the and terms scientific specialized of use the hence them: eliminate or suppress to attempt to even meaning, of aspects 'other' these ignore to education science in traditional been has It us. to meaningful more aspects scientific the render that connotations emotional and idiosyncratic personal, of array the often is it Moreover, tasks. different for use to meaning concept's a of aspects particular which or theory, a use to when and model a use to when example, for knowing, learning: of core the at is that circumstances different to response in understanding of work frame- personal our of aspects appropriate use and select to capacity the is It associations. and meanings idiosyncratic personal, of range wide a alongside jostle meanings' 'approved these course, Of appropriate. is use their when of appreciation an and meaning of aspects scientific desired the incorporate to order in understanding of framework personal their developing and ing modify- in students assist to task teacher's the is it science, teaching In understandings. and meanings of complex this from elements deleting sometimes and modifying to, adding of matter a is Learning moves. individual the which in contexts sociocultural the by enced influ- strongly be will it and experience; to response in time over change will it individual; to individual from vary necessarily will It aspects. ative connot- and denotative of array current the is phrase or word a of meaning the individual, any For revulsion. of feelings trigger may spider drowning; nearly of ones distressing or windsurfing of memories happy up conjure may water anger; or fear anxiety, of feelings arouse may Force experience. previous in located elements emotional and attitudinal include will tions connota- and associations of framework this Often, car. the washing and tea making for used cold, wet, runny, us: for has it associations non-scientific other the all with together on, so and 'C 100 BP 105', = angle bond H—O—H bonding, hydrogen intermolecular with H20), (formula molecule covalent as such elements denotative comprises example, for water, as such term a of understanding our Thus, discussion). extended an for (1992) Sutton (see aspects connotative of periphery wide-ranging a and meaning denotative of core central a comprising as meaning described have writers of number A purposes. different for accumulated meanings of variety a of compounded understanding,5 of framework personal unique a have to student every expect to reasonable more is It explanation? scientific official the by met are poses pur- those of some only that case the not it is so, If purposes? of variety a have also not learners Do plan)? curriculum the in specified those (i.e. tions explana- of set consistent and coherent one only have to students expect educators science should why purpose, different a to suited is each because meanings, of variety a accepts science If sophistication. of levels different at activities their conduct will and knowledge, scientific of use and standing under- their of terms in themselves among differ will scientists that follows 51 •

constructivism of paradox The

52 • Teaching and learning science

term, precisely because it is not an everyday term. Similarly, Greek and Latin terms are often employed in science with the specific intent of eliminating associations. While the increased explanatory power of specialized terms such as photosynthesis is sometimes a sufficient argument for their use, it is also the case that jargonization can increase difficulty and decrease interest for some children. It may even alienate some children from science. aspects of meaning, with their everyBy contrast, it is likely that these

day associations, can provide the key anchoring points for new learning, and so render it more meaningful. We should be encouraging rather than discouraging the connotative aspects of understanding. Similar arguments extend to the formalized language of conventional instruction and the even more ludicrous formalized writing style often and demanded of students, where they are dissuaded from saying that I did such and such' in favour of Procedure x was performed on. . .'. Lemke (1987) criticizes teachers for emphasizing the formal language of science to the exclusion of everyday ways of speaking and writing, arguing that too great an insistence on careful and precise language may help to promote an ideology of authority concerning science and lead students to believe that scientific knowledge is fixed and certain. By contrast, he says, more familiar vocabulary and language forms help students to see the relationship between science and the real world and to appreciate how scientific knowledge derives from everyday, commonsense knowledge (but see later discussion). A related point is that we need to draw a distinction between language

as a means of exploring understanding and language as a means of transmitting knowledge to others — another matter to be discussed in Chapter 13.

Other factors influencing conceptual change When Posner et al. (1982) assert that conceptual change occurs when a student becomes dissatisfied with an existing idea and recognizes a new idea

as intelligible, plausible and fruitful, they seem to imply that conceptual change is an entirely rational process. Indeed, it has become common practice to interpret these conditions for change as a matter of learners simply making a choice based on compelling evidence and argument. However, decisive decisions based on a rational appraisal of evidence for and against particular ideas may be impossible. Concepts cannot be devaluated' separately from their relationships with other concepts and the roles they play within conceptual structures (theories and models). As a consequence, no theory-independent means of appraisal is available. Moreover, conceptual change or modification often has a effect, requiring a change to other, well established understanding that some students may resist for complex emotional and social reasons. If the community of scientists changes its views (or not) for all kinds of

anon-rational' reasons, as discussed in Chapter 2, why should it be any different for individuals? Surely one cannot assign non-rational motives to a

one's is factors non-rational of complex this of part important Another groups. social additional into entry to response in meaning of proliferation the for allows learning of view understanding of framework personal The conform. to pressures social exert will which of each groups, social several of member a is individual each that case the also is It opinion. community of 'gatekeepers' the call might we whom figures major by determined) (even influenced strongly and led is opinion where community, scientific the within course, of work, at are forces same the Exactly 1997). Woodruff and (Meyer strategy teaching important an as regarded be should class the within consensus reaching then, Perhaps, view. of change a legitimating and ating precipit- so conform, to pressure social massive create may hierarchy, power student the to respect with or sense personal a in either important, are who students especially view, particular a hold who students other pressure: social is learning influencing factors non-rational the among least Not 2). (Chapter scientists for legitimate as acknowledges 1986) (1978, Holton that feelings the to similar explanation, reasonable and valid a as counts what and true be cannot and can what about feelings intuitive held strongly have to likely also are dents Stu- uncomfortable'). feel 'humans which (without integrity personal and balance) and harmony beauty, (principally aesthetics satisfying), tionally emo- is (which complexity in simplicity good), feel learners makes (which power of feelings change': conceptual of components 'feeling four include to argument of line this extend 38) (1983: Pines and West hoc'. ad being not and parsimony, economy, 'elegance, to commitments' 'epistemological of influence the to refer they when lines these along something admit 215) (1982: eta!. Posner development. and change conceptual about bringing in factors same these of significance the recognizes also it elements, affective and ential experi- personal highly of array an includes meaning personal that ledges acknow- it Because life. daily ordinary of realities the and practice scientific of realities the acknowledges coexist, can contradictory) (some meanings tiple mul- which within understanding, of framework personal a of development the as regarded be should science in learning that view the contrast, By it. accept to reluctance student's the reinforce may so, doing in and, efforts teaching their misdirect may they consequence, a As it. supports that evidence scientific the understand don't they because is it understanding of framework personal their into idea particular a incorporate to decline students when that obverse: the accept tacitly also They restructuring. ive cognit- in engage to fail evidence, the appraise to capability intellectual the and knowledge, conceptual prior requisite the have to seem who students some why for satisfactorily account to fail they acceptance, ready its in result will idea an of justification evidential the of understanding clear a that assumption the make teachers When on. so and concerns; moral-ethical and economic political, aesthetic, pride; and confidence satisfaction, uncertainty, anxiety, of feelings self-interest; relevance; of perception interest; include: idea an of rejection or acceptance learner's individual an influence might that factors Other it. comprise that individuals the to so doing also without group 53 •

constructivism of paradox The

54 • Teaching and learning science

self-perception. If successful learning depends on learners exploring and developing their store of personal knowledge, and if a significant part of that personal knowledge is experientially determined and includes powerful affective components, then social and cultural identity become significant factors affecting learning. In other words, one's gender, ethnicity, religion and politics, as well as one's emotional well-being, impact very considerably on learning.

Put simply, how students feel about the ideas being presented to them, for whatever reasons, influences their learning. Feelings of wonder, delight, amusement, interest, disinterest, boredom and disgust will clearly impact in different ways on a learning task — sometimes favourably, sometimes unfavourably. Bloom (1992) shows how emotions, values and aesthetics

can influence not only students' willingness or reluctance to engage in a learning task, but also the kinds of meanings that they construct — in the case of the data he presents, about earthworms. Clearly, students will have a strong emotional commitment to ideas that are well established and have been used successfully by them in contexts they regard as personally and/or socially important. Indeed, some ideas are so much a part of the student's everyday life that they are used automatically and unconsciously. Changing them is not easy, especially when they continue to be used by their peers and within family groups, and are promoted by religious teachings or the practices of other sociocultural groups to which the student belongs. Abelson (1986) describes some views as being like 'possessions': they have become so much a part of the student's view of self and sense of identity, held in the face of otherwise substantial changes, that if ever they were abandoned it would only be with the greatest reluctance and an acute sense of loss and discomfort. Similarly, accepting views that are in opposition to views accepted within other groups to which the student belongs or wishes to belong may be so emotionally stressful that it becomes virtually impossible. What I am suggesting is that Posner et al's (1982) conditions for conceptual change need to incorporate a new element: that students feel comfortable

with the new idea, in the sense that it meets their emotional needs and is 'culturally safe'. Mulkay (1979: 41) points to the existence of these kinds of culturally determined predispositions, socialized values, unquestioned assumptions and emotional commitments within the practice of science when he says: 'Most scientific research is carried out in a context in which a whole series of assumptions are so firmly entrenched that their revision or refutation is virtually unthinkable.' It is also the case that some students seem to be more open to new ideas than others, and that these differences are present from an early age (Rokeach 1960). For some, reluctance to change ideas stems from a deep-seated fear of uncertainty. Such students are distrustful of new ideas unless they are presented with authority. Consequently, they seek certainty in knowledge, rather than the ambiguity, fluidity and context-dependence that is characteristic of learning viewed as the development of a personal framework of understanding. A very supportive classroom environment is essential if these

the of meaning of layers deeper the penetrate to students enable doesn't This context. simple single, a in use its cite and theory a of points basic the recall can students feel they where point the at consideration, under topic the of essence the appreciate to students helped have they feel they where point the at teaching stop often teachers making: worth is point final One understanding. ific scient- better about bringing in helpful not are that responses make and our behavi- adopt to students lead may agenda other These image'. their to attending self-worth; of feelings maintain to trying tests); in marks gains that one the is, (that answer' fright the ascertaining attention; teacher unwelcome avoiding thereby busy, look to trying behaviour; compliant for approval teacher seeking including: pursuits, other of number any in engaged actively be may students example, for understanding, their extend to order in explanations competing of appraisal rational the to attending than Rather anticipated. those from different somewhat be may actions their Consequently, stage. planning the during it saw teacher the which in way the to contrast marked in is that way a in it perceive may they task learning a are We with in presented students when that mind bear also should learning. of theories among choosing as making decision curriculum of part a much as just is language of forms appropriate Adopting inadequacy. and frustration of feelings their to contribute or students, alienate or exclude to act also can they way, positive a in students of attitudes and thinking the influence can use language and language of forms particular if that recognize to important also is It community. scientific the within belonging of sense a to extends that classroom the within belonging of sense a promote can language of use teachers' which in ways the of some out points (1995) Moje itself. science within comfortable feel students that ensure to strive also must teachers classroom, the within comfortable feel students making to addition In participate. to enough confident and enough safe enough, free feels everyone which in climate emotional of kind the develop teachers that vital is it Again, tasks. these in engaging from students some dissuade to sufficient be might others by rejected are ideas one's when status losing of risk the and ridicule of Fear uncertainty. of tolerance and self-confidence of measure substantial a require all meaning shared negotiate to and criticism rigorous and vigorous accept and give to debate, to Learning stages. early the in least at children, some for much too be can which activities taking risk- all are others of views the challenging and criticizing and ideas one's expressing questions, Asking risks. taking involves understanding of works frame- personal of development continuous the as conceptualized Learning humour. and sensitivity warmth, with teacher a having as up summed be can which of most essential, are that changes of kinds the discuss (1987) Bentley and Watts understanding. better to path the on steps useful potentially as simply misconceptions) (including ideas current regard to and ideas developing own their proffer to encouraged are they which in style learning a to accommodate to are students 55 •

constructivism of paradox The

56 • Teaching and learning science

theory or to make their personal frameworks of understanding more like those of scientists by using theory in varied contexts. The skilled use of conceptual and procedural knowledge that constitutes scientific connoisseurship only results when formal knowledge can be adapted rapidly and appropriately to specific contexts and problems. The capacity to respond in this way is, in part, a product of a framework of personal understanding in which key con-

cepts are located in a rich and varied array of contextual referents. Much school science learning stops well short of providing opportunities for students to acquire this richness. As Weck (1995: 1290) comments: 'Our very attempts to condense and distill out the essence of our disciplines as an aid to student learning helps reinforce a cultural habit of representational shortcutting (i.e. sound-bites, acronyms, and catch phrases).' By trying to ensure the completion of the syllabus, in what is often an unrealistically brief time allocation, teachers sometimes encourage partial understanding. Often, students are rewarded for simply being able to repeat verbatim a collection of phrases from textbooks. Little attempt is made to probe for deeper levels of understanding or to ascertain whether students can utilize their supposed knowledge in novel situations. By not checking, and by not ensuring that knowledge is properly appropriated and personalized, teachers maintain a classroom culture in which misunderstanding flourishes.

Notes 1 A series of articles in The New Zealand Herald, The Dominion and other provincial newspapers, two symposia at the University of Auckland and the publication of a book under the title Challenging New Zealand Science Education (Matthews 1995) generated nationwide controversy about constructivism and precipitated the pub-

lication of a detailed rebuttal of the Matthews arguments by other New Zealand science educators (Bell 1995). 2 In the final version of the curriculum (Ministry of Education 1993: 9), this is

modified to read 'an activity that is carried out by all people as part of their everyday life' (my emphasis). The change may represent an even more worrying position.

3 A term used to identify those views in the sociology of science influenced by and following in the tradition of David Bloor's (1976) Knowledge and Social Imagery (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul). 4 The essence of radical constructivism is that 'knowledge' refers to the conceptual structures that 'epistemic agents' consider 'viable' (work for them). Thus, science

does not provide truth about the natural world (or anything that aspires to it). Instead, it provides a way to interpret and cope with the natural world that will vary substantially from person to person. These central tenets are captured in these two quotations: 'Knowledge does not reflect an "objective" ontological reality, but exclusively an ordering and organization of a world constituted by our experience'

(von Glasersfeld 1987: 199). 'The basic elements out of which an individual's conceptual structures are composed and the relations by means of which they are held together cannot be transferred from one language user to another . . they must be abstracted from individual experience' (von Glasersfeld 1989: 132). A .

occasions. different on prominent are aspects different which within and development, and modification continuous to subject is that relationships of network a is mind in have I What purposes. my for useful meaning of framework personal term the find I fixed, is that thing some- suggest can 'framework' that concerns (1992) Sutton's acknowledge I While constructivism. of aspects philosophical with dealing bibliography lengthy a and articles ten includes 6(1—2)) (1997, Education and Science of issue special a addition, In (1992). Glasersfeld von in response a with (1997), Kelly and (1994) Matthews (1992), Suchting in found be can views Glasersfeld's von of critique detailed 57 •

5

constructivism of paradox The

•••6 Prioritizing the affective

It is fundamental to the personalized view of learning being developed in this book that the behaviour and eventual attainment of students in science lessons can only be properly understood as the response of a 'whole person' to a complex educational situation involving other 'whole people' (teachers and other students). The cognitive nature of the task is only part of the cluster of variables that influence learning. There are many other elements, including personal concerns and feelings, issues from other lessons and from outside school (some unresolved or only partly resolved), competing priorities and ambitions, self-assessment of personal capabilities and limitations (accurate or not), social mood and structure of the class, feelings and assumptions about the teacher and so on. In other words, a complex of items comprises the social and emotional context in which the learning task is located. A crudal part of that learning context is the view of themselves as learners that students hold. Within a particular lesson, students will adopt a stance (as Claxton 1990 calls it) that they believe will maximize their goals, whatever they might be, and minimize threats and sanctions. Now, because the range of goals and

threats is as much social and emotional as intellectual, a selected stance sets parameters for both academic endeavour and other kinds of classroom behaviour. As well as accessing (or not) the appropriate scientific concepts and generally adopting a 'scientific mind set', students are cued to a particular view of learning (learning by rote, searching for deep understanding, exploring the personal significance of the topic or whatever) and to a particular classroom demeanour (quiet, sociable, enthusiastic, disruptive etc.).

Although each learner's set of stances, from which she or he chooses a response to a particular situation, will be idiosyncratic, depending on his or her particular hopes, fears and experiences, there are some common, generalized stances that all teachers recognize. Claxton (1990) lists swot, boffin, socialite, dreamer and rebel; others might include jocks, jokers and no-hopers. He describes how students select a classroom stance on the basis

Rita.

Rebellious and Wilfred Wise-cracking Bernard, Bullying list doesn't she though Amy, Anxious and Sam Satisfied Sally, Safe Hannah, Hopeless Dick, Defensive to refers (1993) Stipek time; the all stance particular a into locked become students some Sadly, example. for education, religious art, music, — subjects important less as perceive they what during image social their to attend to out' take may science) and maths (English, subjects high-status in swots are who Those Jones!' Debbie same the about talking say, to wont are teachers that so subjects, between evident be can't are differences considerable Sometimes frustration. or failure of face the in no-hopers become may swots unfairly; treated been have they consider they if rebels become may socialites provocative; or relevant consider they may rebels and alites something introduces teacher the when in' soci- track; on longer no is lesson the think they if dreamers or socialites become may swots says, (1989) Claxton As lesson. a within even or topic to topic from lesson, to lesson from stances shift may students Some ethnicity. and gender class, social student's a by impacted be will this all that ing say- without goes almost it and answers, the to afforded weighting relative the and consider they answers the ask, they questions particular the in differ will individuals Clearly, class. in behave to how deciding in — sciously uncon- or consciously — ask may students that questions the of some just are These school? in successful am I if me disown friends my Will them? upset to intention my it Is care? I Do stance? rebel or socialite the adopt I if angry or disappointed be members family Will miserable? life my make rebels and socialites the will hard, work to decide I If future? in me of expected be much too will successful, am I and try I If wrong? or silly something say simply or fail, and try I if self-esteem my on impact the is What teacher? this or class, this with standing my is What issues: social and emotional complex of manner all includes analysis this necessary, judged is that effort the worth is it whether and likely is learning successful whether of questions obvious more the to addition In stance. particular a adopting of costs and benefits the of analysis rapid a in bear to brought is students other and curriculum the teacher, the of experience Previous choice? particular a with associated are penalties and sacrifices What situation? this by presented are social) behavioural, (intellectual, opportunities What time? this at urgent more are Which incompatible? which and compatible are Which social)? emotional, vocational, (academic, priorities of portfolio current my is What

• • • •

considerations: following the of all or any account into take may that process decision-making unconscious largely intuitive, an of 59 • affective

the Prioritizing

60 • Teaching and learning science

Building a view of self as learner If Claxton, Stipek and others are right, students are constantly appraising the educational situations in which they are located, constantly making decisions based upon their estimates of competing priorities, opportunities, demands, resources and risks. Only when the emotional and motivational factors considered in the cost—benefit analysis and decision making result in a decision that permits or encourages involvement in learning will students engage in the task. So it is only in those cases that significant attainment is possible. Moreover, all kinds of social forces, including sexism and racism, may act to restrict an individual's freedom for choice, creating the kinds of injustices that prevent those from particular subcultural groups having proper access to science education. Those who utilize crude notions of intellectual ability or intelligence to account for academic attainment seriously misjudge

the nature of the learning enterprise. Capacity to learn cannot and should not be inferred from current levels of attainment and current classroom behaviour. Such crudeness fails to take account of the complexity and subtlety of the decision making that underpins a learner's classroom stance. And it fails to take account of the considerable variations in emotional climate between classrooms and, from student to student, even within a classroom.

Just as one's ability to do science and to learn science depend on prior knowledge (of science), so one's response to a particular situation, including classroom events, depends on one's previous experience (good and bad) of similar situations. How we act and react to the world depends on how we perceive it, and how we perceive it depends on what has gone before and the understanding we have constructed about it. In one sense, then, there is no 'reality', merely our various perceptions of it. Consequently, one's learning behaviour depends on one's 'learning knowledge', and this is built up

through experience of other learning situations and their outcomes. How a student responds to a learning task is largely driven by recollections of previous encounters and the feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction that resulted. Everything that happens in the classroom (presentation of information, giving of instructions, personal interactions, use of individual versus group work etc.) can have emotional impact, and this can vary considerably from individual to individual. Each student reacts at a personal level to both the personal characteristics and professional practices of her or his teachers.

In learning something new, one moves away from the familiarity and safety of the known into the uncertainty of the unknown. Mistakes are inevitable. Occasional feelings of confusion, apprehension and loss of confidence are inevitable. It would be surprising if learners didn't sometimes feel anxious, frustrated, distressed or even angry. An effective learning environment is one that develops each student's ability to anticipate and cope with these feelings. Unfortunately, many schools do a poor job in this respect. Claxton (1991) lists some of the more destructive beliefs about the relationship between learning and self-worth that schools often promote:

Maslow self-actualization, achieved have who those of characteristics the Among achievable. are they which to extent the of understanding an gain and ambitions personal our clarify to needs us of Each potential. our ing achiev- are we whether know can we before of capable are we what know to have we self-realization: is self-actualization of part course, Of potential. one's fulfilling or self-actualization, is hierarchy Maslow's of stage final The dimensions. external and internal both has self-esteem that us minding re- is He appreciation). importance, prestige, (reputation, recognition for desire the and freedom) and autonomy personal independence, (adequacy, competence for desire the self-esteem: with associated needs of sets two identifies Maslow level, next the At belong. they that feel to and affection receive and give to need children all priority: in next comes belonging' and 'love for need The students. for secure emotionally and safe physically made be must environment learning the — to attended be must safety met, been have needs physiological basic Once met. thoroughly been have needs level lower when enhanced is levels higher at progress and level, higher a at those to attend can we before satisfied be must level lower a at Needs archy. hier- a as arranged are needs human basic (1970), Maslow to According punishments. and ties penal- incentives, rewards, of use the and parents) peers, (teachers, others of responses the including learner, the to external factors of cluster a by impacted also is Motivation there. place take that activities of kinds the and onment envir- classroom particular the about feelings negative and positive success; of expectations and competencies abilities, worth, own their about beliefs tions; aspira- and goals needs, interests, students' including: learner, the to internal factors of cluster a of composed is task learning a in engage to Motivation

motivation of elements Some school. the and teacher the from support appropriate and motivation appropriate is lack they What learn. not do but learn, can students Many different. quite are drdumstances ideal more under achieve can they what and school in achieve normally students What learning. of performance the and learn to capacity the between drawn is distinction clear a that important is It failures. as themselves identifying or teacher, the on dependent excessively or aggressive becoming it, avoiding by themselves defend students and threatening becomes Learning self-esteem. students' some impair seriously can and shame, and guilt of feelings induce can task learning uncertain and difficult any attend that nervous feeling and confused being incompetence, of experiences inevitable the falsehoods, these of Because

vulnerable. or apprehensive anxious, feel not do themselves; of images their within, and to, up live on; going is what know always mistakes; make not do 61 • affective

people people people people

worthwhile worthwhile worthwhile worthwhile

• • • •

the Prioritizing

62 •

Teaching and learning science

(1970) lists the following: a better perception of reality; acceptance of self and others; spontaneity, simplicity and naturalness; problem-centredness (the individual has some mission in life or task to fulfil); autonomy; openness to new experiences and understanding; sympathetic understanding of others; deeper and more profound interpersonal relations; democratic in outlook; sense of humour; creative; resistant to assimilation. In a later work, Maslow (1971) also talks about the further goal of self-transcendence, in which reflection and contemplation give rise to deeper and richer levels of intuition. It

is central to Maslow's theory that the affective needs lower in the

hierarchy must have been thoroughly met before any significant progress in the cognitive domain can be made. The point is clearly made: a stable emotional climate is essential to cognitive growth. In a trusting and supportive environment, learners are willing to take the intellectual risks that are the key to developing more sophisticated understanding. When they feel threatened or insecure, or feel that they are not loved and valued, they may withdraw. Further, if we are to reach higher levels of the cognitive hierarchy, we must foster each child's self-esteem and self-actualization. Of course, Maslow's work can be seen either as a way of identifying learning problems

(through diagnosis of inadequately met needs) or as a guide to more effective curriculum building, depending on our penchant for 'deficiency models' of education versus 'growth models'. As an aside, it is worth mentioning

that teachers have these same needs, and a school intent on creating a better learning environment for all students should also pay attention to meeting the needs of its teachers — an aspect of school life that is often woefully neglected. While subsequent research and theorizing about motivation have generated many areas of dispute and controversy, there is an emerging consensus

on which teachers can draw. First, all of us (students and teachers) have a need for experiences that generate feelings of competence, accomplishment, recognition and self-esteem, and a need to avoid those that generate feelings of failure, worthlessness and disapproval. Second, all individuals have a natural tendency to be intrinsically motivated when enabled to focus on personal learning goals without fear of failure, and when learning is perceived as personally meaningful and relevant, and meets the needs for autonomy and self-determination — that is, when we can make decisions and have some control over the learning process. Some years ago, Vroom (1964) conceptualized motivation as the product of value and expectancy:

motivation = value x expectancy

We are only motivated to learn when we value, in a personal sense, that which is to be learned. If we don't care about it, if we don't see it as relevant to our needs, interests, aspirations and experiences, we are unlikely to have the necessary commitment to learn. This is a strikingly clear message about

success that provided aspiration, of levels raise to tendency the stronger the learner, the of success the greater the that is dispute beyond seems What students. to ingful mean- and interesting are that contexts in learning science essential locate can we targets, achievable and reasonable set can We way! that be to have doesn't It difficult. schools in science making by expectation this reinforce teachers often, too and, difficult be to science expect students most ately, Unfortun- learning. successful experiences everyone that ensuring by levels expectancy students' raising is Second 1994). (Aikenhead content science traditional more on than science of aspects humanitarian and aesthetic and issues environmental considerations, social on value higher put students that example, for evidence, is there — value students that curriculum a viding protwo suggests Vroom's First intervention. sites is for work curriculum ability. of lack a to failure attribute to boys than likely more were and failure of cause a as it) of lack (or effort on boys did than emphasis less place to tended girls consequence, a As girls. with did they than boys with frequently more motivation of lack to directly referred they failure, of cases in addition, In aspects. non-intellectual regarding girls with positively and boys with ively negat- interacting while work, their of quality intellectual the to regard with girls with negatively and boys with positively interact to tended Teachers class. in failure and success for reasons the of views girls' and boys' between differences in resulted which students, with interactions verbal teachers' in differences gender-related disturbing and startling revealed (1978) al. et Dweck by research detailed and Lengthy common. more is this perhaps ally, tragic- and, possible also is — messages transmitted implicitly through ance perform- child's a depressing inadvertently — effect reverse the Presumably, skills. and style cognitive his as well as motivation, his and behavior, own his of expectations his concept, self his changing by learn child the helped have may techniques teaching in changes possible with together communications Such performance. intellectual improved expected she that group experimental the of children the to municated com- have may teacher the touch, her by perhaps and postures, sions, expres- facial her by it, said she when and how by said, she what By

conclude: researchers the Classroom, the in Pygmalion study classic 180) (1968: Jacobson's and Rosenthal In ways. implicit and explicit of manner all in them to ated communic- as expectations, teacher's the from and it, of lack or success, past of evidence from come normally would success of expectation dents' stu- school, In successfully. learn can we that expect to have we learn to motivated be to order in that us tells equation Vroom's in factor other The intended. was it way the in it perceive students that so task, learning of clarity ensure to us reminds also It 1). Chapter (see design curriculum science in context and content both of importance the 63 • affective

the Prioritizing

64 •

Teaching and learning science

doesn't come too easily. For example, Solomon (1996) shows that when students are assisted in performing better in examinations by the provision of 'revision sheets', even if they employ rote learning methods, self-esteem is enhanced and better learning follows. By contrast, unexpected and continued failures tend to lower students' levels of aspiration. Moreover, persistent failure prevents students from making a reasonable estimate of their capabilities, and so prevents them setting realistic goals for themselves. However, failures can sometimes be useful learning experiences, both cognitively (provided there is productive feedback) and affectively (perhaps everyone

needs to experience failure once in a while, but in a supportive emotional climate). It seems that a judicious use of success and (limited) failure could form a productive classroom strategy. It is worth noting, however, that highly valued goals may sometimes trigger a lowering of levels of aspiration, as students strive to ensure some measure of success. Of particular interest to teachers, of course, is why some students persist in their efforts to learn, even when the task is complex and difficult, while

others do not. There is evidence that even some high achieving students, many of them girls, have surprisingly low expectations of their future performance in science and are easily debilitated by any failure to learn. As a consequence, they tend to avoid difficult or challenging tasks or give up as soon as things begin to get tough. Nicholls (1984, 1989) calls these strategies maladaptive motivational patterns. By contrast, adaptive motivational patterns

are those that lead students to engage positively in challenging tasks and to gain satisfaction from doing so. Students exhibiting these characteristics are often very persistent, even in the face of obstacles. Dweck (1986) argues that a key factor in determining motivational patterns is the student's view or theory of intelligence. Those who believe that intelligence is fixed (and genetically determined) tend to be oriented towards 'providing evidence' of that intelligence, and gaining the teacher's favourable judgement of it through the successful completion of tasks — that is, they have performance goals. Those who believe that intelligence is a more malleable or developmental quality tend to be oriented towards developing that quality and acquiring or developing understanding — that is, they have learning goals. Different goals initiate different patterns of learning behaviour, patterns that are reinforced by teachers' educational priorities, views of learning, expectations of student attainment and beliefs about intelligence. Students who consider intelligence to be a fixed quantity regard cognitive tasks as occasions during which their intelligence will be assessed and, possibly, their weaknesses exposed, while those who consider intelligence to be a malleable and acquired skill see cognitive tasks as opportunities

to 'become smarter'. It follows that these latter students are much more favourably inclined towards challenging cognitive activities. Moreover, students who consider intelligence to be an acquired skill probably believe that

successful learning has resulted in a significant change in their ability to think, whereas students who believe intelligence to be fixed will simply see it as further evidence of a capability they knew they already had.

the exactly in notes class and text from material reproducing by gained are marks maximum Often, reward. usually examinations and tests what is recall simple because processing', through recall superficial seek to content be may grades, and marks through affirmation seek to tendency their with students, performance-oriented processing', calls (1981) Entwistle what through understanding seek to likely more are students learning-oriented while example, For learning-oriented. are who those of strategies productive more the penalize to and students performance-oriented of habits bad the reinforce to serve teachers science of practices traditional the of Many improves. performance sequence, con- a As strategy. future modify and performance analyse to them use and mistakes, their from learn they errors; and difficulties use and exploit do, and can, They students. these for problematic so nearly not is fidence con- Maintaining experience. the from learn will they believe they because learning) foster (that tasks challenging choose will students such low, relatively as ability their estimate they when Even it. in be will they ested inter- how and task the in engagement from benefit will they how learn, will they what on concentrate students these peers, and teachers by judged be will they how wondering and hand, in task the to relation in level ability their estimating of Instead experience. through knowledge or skills acquire to order in ignorance their displaying risk to willing are and challenge by encouraged are goals learning towards oriented students contrast, By self-esteem. to threat greater a as seen are therefore, and, subjects difficult as students by perceived generally are they because subjects other in than mathematics and science in common more is withdrawal that out points (1986) Dweck understanding. of growth promote would that activities very the from withdraw They up. give may students these consequence, a As future. the in failure likely and ability low of evidence as interpreted readily are difficulties and Errors difficult. is fidence con- maintaining students, these For challenge. of avoidance and strategies defensive promote goals performance words, other In tasks. easy on smart' to opportunities for exchange in mistakes making of risks involve that opportunities learning valuable sacrifice may ability their of estimates high with individuals Even self-estimates. their revise to having of trauma the from and ability their concerning judgements external further from protected are they case, either In succeed. to expected be would one no because matter doesn't failure where tasks, difficult excessively for opt will or assured, is success where tasks, easy personally choose will they possible, is task of choice Whenever behaviour. avoidance task by themselves ing protect- ability, of lack perceived their conceal to attempt will they succeed, cannot they that estimate they If set. is that task any complete to capacity their about decision early an make will goals performance towards oriented are who students those quantity, fixed a as intelligence regard they that citly, expli- or implicitly either students, to convey teachers where situation a In

habits bad and good Promoting 65 • affective

the Prioritizing

66 •

Teaching and learning science

form in which the teacher presented it. To do that, the student does not have to think very deeply about it, or to reorder or restructure the ideas. Many of

these students don't even recognize how superficial their understanding is, and so don't take steps to improve it. Moreover, learning-oriented students, who do engage in restructuring in order to personalize their understanding, don't gain sufficient extrinsic reward for having done so. In many schools, self-directed effort to understand the material is wasted effort as far as tangible reward is concerned.

A learning orientation is likely to be encouraged or discouraged by the extent to which the teacher requires, encourages, accepts, tolerates or actively discourages idiosyncracy and the expression of personalized meaning. Detecting and pointing out errors in students' work, and providing informative and corrective feedback quickly, and within a stable and supportive emotional climate, are further steps a teacher can take. In a sense, this speaks to the charge of relativism levelled at some constructivists in Chapter 5. When students pass tests by simple recall of previously given notes, as in traditional learning situations, there is little incentive to engage in the difficult and emotionally challenging business of making personalized meaning. However, when constructivist-oriented teachers accept student explanations and answers that are inappropriate, incomplete or wrong, as Matthews (199 3a, 1995) suggests they often do, student misunderstanding is compounded, science is trivialized and bad learning habits are reinforced.

Teachers need to be demanding in the quality of response they expect, as otherwise performance-oriented students will be content with giving sloppy and ill-considered answers. They also need to be flexible enough to recognize interesting and worthwhile responses that don't simply reproduce textbook language, as otherwise learning-oriented students will be discouraged and performance-oriented students will be further encouraged to engage in simple recall. It is also important to provide vigorous, personalized and informative feedback on student errors. When students are wrong, they need to know that they are wrong, and why.' It is here that I part company with those constructivists who carefully avoid labelling any student idea a misconception. Self-esteem and motivation are not well served by pretence of success. Students also need to know how they can avoid similar errors in future. The commitment to positive reinforcement methods, particularly the use of frequent praise in response to small units of approved behaviour or fairly minimal correct responses, can be counterproductive. Presenting performance-oriented children with very easy tasks in familiar contexts does nothing

to help them deal later on with challenging and unfamiliar tasks. If anything, it serves to make them even more afraid of them. Instead of rewarding success in trivial tasks, we should be encouraging students to regard learning problems differently. Rather than attributing their failure to learn or understand to lack of ability, we should encourage students to attribute it to the selection of an inappropriate learning strategy (which can, of course, be readily changed). We should be assisting students to expect difficulties

a with interact elements motivational two These answers. unambiguous and clear demands teacher a which to extent the on course, of depends, closure non-specific or specific for need The closure. avoid to need a to lead will wrong being of penalties or costs the stressing while closure, for need a generate will limits time Setting thinking. continue to order in answer an on settling delay to tendency the is closure' 'avoiding engagement; ive cognit- further ending thereby 'answer', an obtain to desire individual's an to refers closure' 'Seeking closure. of specificity/non-specificity and closure avoiding or seeking motivation: epistemic of dimensions general two posits He motivation. epistemic of theory a calls he what of terms in tasks learning in involvement student of patterns different for accounts (1989) Kruglanski understanding. deeper a develop to intended, teacher the as them, using of instead problem, a to solutions or explanations as devices pedagogical these repeat and recall to encouraged be thereby may orientation performance a towards inclined already Students role. instrumental limited their students to clear making without across' point the 'get to metaphors and analogies models, convenient theories', 'simplified of use the can too, So, orientation. performance a promote inadvertently can phrasing Careless assignments. class of wording the through students to conveyed are expectations teacher Implicit attention. for focus important another is language Classroom tasks. these perform to ability own their in beliefs students' on effects positive have can overcome, subsequently they which difficulties, experiencing others Seeing tutoring. group peer for role a be also may There beyond). and 8 Chapters (see scaffolding and modelling through contexts science specific in understanding of framework personal their expand and restructure to how in guidance explicit more given be can Students 4. Chapter in discussed activities of kinds the by fostered is and awareness metacognitive in rooted is confidence of kind This others. and oneself in development and change about bring to order in arguments rival consider and evidence gather think, to ability one's in confidence standing, under- that reorganize and reconceptualize to ability one's in confidence as too) important, is this when occasions are there (though understanding one's in confidence a much so not is learning good of productive more is What be. may ideas those change to resistant more the understanding, their in have they confidence more The ideas. their develop or change to unwilling be may they knowledge existing their in confidence have students when example, For not. sometimes productive, be can confidence Sometimes situation-specific. as task a complete to capacity their about beliefs dents' stu- of think to helpful be may it motivation, of aspects other with As activities. wordprocessing of use extensive more by about brought been have activities writing in mistakes and errors of perceptions students' in shifts identical virtually that reflecting worth is it pie-in-the-sky, and idealistic hopelessly as suggestion this regard might some While ideas. one's reorder to chance a opportunity, learning further a as taken be can problem a solve to failure Thus, replanning. or rethinking by overcome be can that 'glitches' or 'bugs' as them see to them, avoid to than rather obstacles, and 67 • affective

the Prioritizing

68 •

Teaching and learning science

student's prior knowledge, which may be extensive or sparse, to produce different epistemic motivational responses. For example, when students with little relevant knowledge are presented with a need for non-specific closure, they may work well until they find an answer, any answer, at which point

they will stop. Those with extensive knowledge may not even begin the task, because they believe they already have an answer that will suffice. Creating the need for specific closure will motivate both groups of students to persist longer in order to find an answer that meets the specificity criteria. However, if there are high costs associated with being wrong, students may avoid closure altogether. Those students with low levels of knowledge will adopt an 'ignorance-is-bliss' approach and avoid reaching an answer at all; those with extensive knowledge may try to find as many feasible answers as possible to avoid being 'pinned down' and judged right or wrong. Teachers who reinforce students' bad habits may contribute to what some psychologists call 'learned helplessness', a condition in which individuals

believe that they are unable to surmount negative outcomes. The most striking characteristic of 'helpless students' is their tendency to view failure as predictive, while discounting their successes. The tendency to discount success cannot help but have adverse impact on students' persistence on a complex or difficult task. Thus, helpless students, who explain their failures in ways that make failures seem uncontrollable, persist less (regardless of their actual ability level) and resort to progressively less effective strategies for problem-solving following failure. Those teachers who reinforce their students' good habits assist them to become learning-oriented or masteryoriented. In contrast to helpless students, mastery-oriented students tend to interpret failure as a cue to escalate their efforts. They view feedback about failure as useful information they can use in altering their strategy or reconsidering the effort they expend. As a consequence, they often respond to failure with increased persistence or improved problem-solving efficiency (Diener and Dweck 1978). They also appear to be able to tolerate a lapse from perfect performance and still regard themselves as successful (Diener and Dweck 1980). The foregoing discussion suggests three major targets for intervention: the student and his or her views of self as learner; the curriculum; the overall emotional climate of the classroom.

Helping learners to help themselves I have suggested already that a learning or mastery orientation is likely to be assisted by explicit teaching of metacognitive strategies. Students who have more useful knowledge about learning strategies, and the circumstances in

which they are and are not successful, have a greater sense of control of their learning and greater confidence in their capacity to deal successfully with difficult or novel problems. Bad learning habits can be cured or avoided altogether, good learning techniques can be taught and students can become

developing anxiety, and insecurity of sources identifying — stage next The different. be should perhaps, and, different be could reality own their that awareness reach can students 'realities', different construct people different which in ways the recognizing By behaviour. and motivation emotions, their choose to turn, in and, it control to empowered are they building, knowledge and thinking own their understanding By 'reality'. own their and opment devel- own their of control in feel to them helping in step first the is This attitudes. and beliefs thoughts, creating in engaged actively being of ness aware- students' increasing include stages Early (1994). Pope and McCombs and (1993) Raffini (1992), Timm in found be can motivation intrinsic ize maxim- and autonomy enhance self-esteem, build functioning, chological psy- their understand to students helping for strategies easy-to-use Some directions. positive more in efforts their redirect and them overcome can they — perspective different a gaining by essence, in — thoughts their redirect to choosing By learn. to motivation the and feelings positive disrupts that things these about feel they how is it that recognize to and learning their hinder may that factors the of) (some identify to students for possible is It self-motivated. be to ity abil- the acquire and thinking their over (agency) control personal gain can they levels; motivational and feelings beliefs, their among relationships the understanding of capable are students that is presenting am I argument The differently.' act can I therefore, and, beliefs these feed that emotions and thoughts the control can 'I that understanding alternative the by overridden be can science' at good no am 'I belief negative the works, mind own your how understand you Once minds! thinking our inside originate Feelings think. we what controlling by feelings our control can us of each then selves, our- by generated are thoughts and thoughts from come feelings if words, other In system.2 belief conditioned a beyond proceed to possible is it ing, think- one's controlling and understanding By behaviours. learning different to lead can thereby, and, change can environments learning and classrooms of perception our so science, different and more do to and science new learn to us enables thereby, and, changes store knowledge procedural and conceptual our as Just behaviour. and feelings our on have thoughts these control and influence the change can we that unaware are we if only our behavi- classroom and motivation in role crucial a play science', at good no years, over up am as the built oneself about beliefs and Knowledge such control. conscious more under brought be can thoughts these that recognizing (b) behaviour; and moods one's influence can thinking which in ways the understanding (a) steps: major two are There students. motivated intrinsically oriented, learning- as themselves reconstructing in students assisting affective: the prioritizing for argument chapter's this of crux the and metacognition, for role ambitious more much a is propose now I what However, independence. intellectual to path the on step early vital a conscious', made be can old years 8 as young as students even that reports (1994) Gunstone behaviours. learning their developing and monitoring into habituated 69 • affective

the Prioritizing

70 •

Teaching and learning science

feelings of empathy with others, recognizing sources of interpersonal conflict and devising ways of peacefully resolving conflicts — has much in common with the strategies of peace education (Hicks 1988) and humane education

(Selby 1995). It is followed by helping students to relate personal needs, interests and aspirations to learning goals and to shift from what Nicholls (1989) calls an ego involvement (concern with enhancing and protecting judgements about one's ability) to task involvement (concern with learning goals). Effecting this shift is largely a matter of judicious design and selection of

learning activities to maximize intrinsic motivation and the adoption of appropriate assessment and evaluation strategies.

Some implications for curriculum Learning activities can be classified in a number of ways in relation to their potential for fostering intrinsic motivation. Clearly, comprehension and evaluation tasks are more useful than simple memory tasks or routine, procedural exercises; personally meaningful tasks with strong sociopolitical overtones are more useful than sanitized, remote, abstract academic tasks. For Deci and Ryan (1985: 32), the desire to meet challenges is at the core of all intrinsically motivating activities, as is the need to feel competent and autonomous.

The intrinsic needs for competence and self-determination motivate an ongoing process of seeking and attempting to conquer optimal challenges. When people are free from the intrusion of drives and emotions,

they seek situations that interest them and require the use of their creativity and resourcefulness. They seek challenges that are suited to their competencies, that are neither too easy nor too difficult. Almost any activity can become intrinsically motivating if it meets the following conditions. •

It provides an appropriate level of challenge and is perceived by students

as challenging, meaningful and authentic (relevant to life outside the classroom).

• Informative feedback is provided on current levels of performance and advice is given concerning future learning strategy. • The activity is free from other distractions and constraints. • Learners are acting under their own volition. • Orientation in assessment moves away from a concern with competition and comparison, and towards a focus on giving insight into the personalized framework of understanding of individual students, a move which may entail giving students some measure of choice regarding style of assessment.

Kruglanski's work points to the need for teachers to consider the motivational elements of a particular task for a particular learner. Blanket assumptions

here. relevant is 8) ter Chap- (see development proximal of zone a of notion (1978) Vygotsky's easily. relatively it acquire to able be to them expect to reasonable is it where or already knowledge necessary the have students where context a in lems prob- difficult locate to is key The up. give soon will students and difficult too incentive; no is there and easy too challenge: of levels optimal are there Clearly, relevance. environmental and social personal, course, of and, surprise education), science of aspect neglected much (a fantasy novelty, choice, challenge, include interest situational students' increase that Features grades. good gain consistently who science, learning and science in interested supposedly the for even gramme, generally those is, that — students' pro- the in topic every enlivening for need the about teachers to messages clear are there orientation, performance a beyond proceed to students age encour- to sufficient be not may interest personal generalized while tion, orienta- learning a to leads interest situational strong general, in Since, practices. assessment in shift a from come may dilemma the of resolution before, As proceed. to best how decide to student a for difficult be may it case, a such In activity. same the for grades) good for concern generalized (a goals performance and understand) to desire (a goals mastery both to rise give circumstances These career). a entering in example, (for importance long-term perceived its of because sense general a in it values also but topic, particular a in interest of level high a has student a which in arise could situation A orientation. mastery a of features are which strategies, control metacognitive of deployment and processing deeper to lead interest situational of levels high that seems It learning. better in result may it task, a on spent being time more in result not may interest situational Although activity. particular a of interest' 'situational the consider to need we class, in persistence and effort involvement, attention, of levels overall their influences which science, learning and science in interest personal general more students' to addition In interest. of effect motivational the to regard with motivation specific situation- versus generalized about point similar a makes (1990) Hidi scheme. assessment the of nature the on course, of depend, may Much marks. gain to order in closure demands that student particular a of orientation goal performance general more much the override can task particular a on closure avoiding of goal epistemic the tion, interven- teacher sensitive given whether, is clear not is What restructuring. conceptual facilitate to likely more are closure premature avoid to need a create and open-ended are that activities however, general, In well. content curriculum the knows who and well, students the knows who someone by judgement teacher skilled for need the of case another yet is so and situation, educational particular the on depends It choice. wiser the be will answers specific for demand a and/or pressures time which in situations are there and appropriate, are constraints time no with activities open-ended when occasions are There appropriate. longer no are not, are which and motivated are students which and doesn't, what and motivates what of 71 •

affective the Prioritizing

72 •

Teaching and learning science

Confidence in one's ability to accomplish a task, no matter how well placed that confidence may be, does not necessarily translate into good learning behaviour. Students also need to feel a sense of control. First, they

need to feel that they have personal control of their actions and are empowered to act in the way they consider appropriate; second, they need to feel that their actions will influence the eventual outcome and its consequences in the way they predict (Ames 1992). Choice of what to study, how to study and how to organize and present work increases students' perceptions of control, and often translates into deeper levels of processing and cognitive engagement and fosters the adoption of more effective metacognitive strategies. Achieving one's own goals is clearly more motivating than achieving someone else's! Project work is ideal for giving students a feeling of greater control, though there may be dangers in giving students too much choice too soon. It can be overwhelming for inexperienced students, who are unable to make responsible and productive decisions. Questions about choice of topic, whether to promote individual projects or group efforts and how much control of the various elements in the project to give to students are clearly a matter of teacher judgement, taking into account the particular circumstances and the particular students. Inexperienced students may be unable to exercise their control wisely. They may be tempted to spend more of their time on those topics where they already possess extensive knowledge, thus reinforcing their existing views, rather than changing or developing them. One tactic is for teachers to retain control of content (directing students to new areas, as appropriate) while ceding control of learning methods or learning style to students. Riding et al. (1995) regard learning styles as distributed in a two-dimensional space defined by an x-axis from verbalizing to imaging and a y-axis from analytical to holistic. Science education has traditionally favoured analysts over holists and verbalizers over imagers, despite the fact that (a) individual preferences are developed early (often prior to 10 years old), and (b) it is reasonable to assume that learning would be assisted and motivation increased by allowing students to exercise their preference. Since Riding and colleagues argue that preference among learning styles can be changed by explicit teaching of alternatives, there is a case for providing a much wider range of teaching and learning methods than has been traditional in science education, together with much more explicit guidance on how to benefit from them. In this way, students' 'learning capabilities' as well as their 'learning consciousness' would be enhanced and they would be

better equipped for those all too frequent occasions when choice is not allowed or not possible. In their analysis of student control over learning strategies, Pintrich et al. (1993: 190) distinguish two aspects of metacognitive control: tactical control ('the students' ability to monitor and fine-tune thought as they work through the details of particular tasks'), which helps students to sustain the mental effort to remain on a specific task; and strategic control ('the ability to engage in purposeful thought over what might seem to be disconnected elements'),

students. to signal powerful very a send can newsletters, and journals for writing and courses for enrolling conferences, attending about freely talking and students, with development professional own one's Discussing guises. different in times several appears and learning, of personalization the for arguments book's this of rationale underlying the in point key a is belief' conditioned from 'escape This clarify. will discussion subsequent as inappropriate, and appropriate wrong, is what of views their reconsider teachers science that important also is It

and right

3

2

1

Notes chapters. subsequent in said be will more which on matter a is ling model- Teacher conflicts. resolve and avoid to order in moods and thoughts monitoring of processes the modelling goals,3 personal to relation in valued is learning that showing competence, of value the and expertise modelling learning, for enthusiasm modelling shift: desired the about bringing in role significant a play also can modelling Teacher feedback. and couragement en- support, guidance, teacher of lots by accompanied but control, teacher minimal and challenge intellectual of level appropriate an interest, personal and control learner of levels high to shift a by fostered is learning Good high. is control teacher and low, are control learner and interest personal challenge, intellectual learning, of forms traditional most in general, In balance. proper the striking in involved is judgement teacher Considerable self-esteem. enhancing thereby expert, to novice from transition of signal a and competence developing a of recognition external as perceived be can they Conversely, self-determination. and autonomy of sense their undermining thereby device, control a as students by perceived be can Rewards problematic. be can attainment of levels high for students ing reward- Even practices. assessment competitive ego-oriented, our of sequence con- direct a often is students performance-oriented of fostering the and learning science from Withdrawal raised. is assessment appropriate as counts what of issue the motivation, of aspects all with As it. on reflection critical by crucially, and, job' the learn students words, other In activities. these in engagement by fostered are belief of categories both Moreover, tasks. learning complex other and work project problem-solving, in engagement successful for necessary are beliefs control strategic and tactical Both time. of periods longer over efforts maintain and coordinate to them helps which 73 • affective

the Prioritizing

... 7 Exploring some social dimensions of learning

Previous discussion has addressed some of the ways in which the feelings, beliefs and personal aspirations of students interact with the processes of cognitive restructuring. It has been argued that incorporation of a new idea into one's personal framework of understanding involves more than a rational appraisal in terms of its intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness. The idea also has to 'make sense' in affective terms. In other words, knowledge doesn't just have to make logical sense, it also has to feel right; students have to be comfortable with it. Being comfortable with an idea also has a social dimension. Each of us, whether adult or child, needs the agreement of others if we are to feel comfortable with our ideas, and each of us needs the approval and support of someone else if we are to feel personally validated. Thus, we often talk as much to get reassurance from others about our ideas as we do to convince others of our views. As Solomon (1987: 67) says, 'We take it for granted that those who are close to us see the world as we do, but, through social exchanges, we seek always to have this reconfirmed.' These social exchanges also serve to establish what others think and so assist the learning of knowledge that has been validated and approved by the social groups to which we belong. Of course, we don't simply accept the views of others in the group unquestioningly, no more than others accept our views without question — though teachers, parents, priests, family physicians and the like may need to be constantly on their guard lest this should happen, especially with young children. Within most social groups, participants make tentative remarks to invite discussion and to seek consensus,

making use of the comments of others to extend and modify their own understanding before reaching a firm conclusion. Thus, meaning is negotiated through social interaction. Within these groups, members also negotiate the social relationships with which they are comfortable, adopting a role as leader, tireless questioner, patient explainer, social facilitator and so on, though these roles may, of course, change over time. If meaning is, in part, socially constructed, it follows that different social groups can negotiate and

relating issues social complex raise occurred, have that understanding tual concep- in changes on discussion through reflecting and others of views the challenging and criticizing ideas, own their expressing in students involving as 4, Chapter in discussed strategies constructivist the of Many such well-being. personal of feelings to threats and risks minimizes and benefits personal maximizes that role a themselves for negotiate individuals as learning on impact significant have will life' forçlassroom These learning. of process rational supposedly the with interfere can which of any or all — on so and boyfriend or girlfriend a attracting others, impressing friends, making — goals social many have Students them. of hold others have to wish or themselves of hold students image the with consistent are they which to extent the by influenced be to likely are others of rejection the and ideas some of adoption the Consequently, aspirations. group and pressures social by driven and constrained are Both are. scientists than more any agents', not are school in science learning Individuals classroom. science the in experiences their from understanding scientific meaningful personally and usable a construct students which in ways the about ask should teachers laboratory, science the in experiences their from knowledge consensual and consensible construct scientists which in ways the about ask sociologists that questions same The knowledge. build students how about theories our in them include to reasonable seems it 2), (Chapter ledge know- build scientists how of theories our in factors social include we If task. the of understanding cognitive on dependence its to equal extent an to group the within interactions social the of quality the on depends activities these of outcome The large. especially writ are learning of sions dimen- social the that on, so and bench the of cleaning the and apparatus the of return the organize presented, be to results the on agree readings, of recording and taking the and equipment of manipulation for sub-tasks assign apparatus, assemble and collect instructions, the comprehend to have students where activities, these during is It work. practical during especially work, group small of use extensive teacher's science the by significance more given issue an — understanding individual to as well as experience, with and time over changes it which in ways the and meaning, constructed socially to attention pay to have we that means this science, school of terms In interaction. social of patterns to response in meanings and understandings roles, social of shifting constant a is there Thus, members. group other of actions and words the to response in positions, value their even and usage language our, behavi- of codes ideas, thoughts, their of modification continuing a in engaged also are They interactions. interpersonal complex to response in intentions and attitudes aspirations, hopes, their adjusting continually are individuals group, social any within Furthermore, changes. situation social the as reliably, and quickly group each to appropriate behaviour of codes and language knowledge, the access to able be to and understanding of framework one than more with familiar be to need they group, social one than more of ship member- have individuals since Moreover, meanings. different construct 75 •

learning of dimensions social some Exploring

76 •

Teaching and learning science

to the nature of student—teacher and student—student interactions. In class discussion involving the teacher, there is an asymmetry in terms of knowledge, authority and linguistic skills, which usually results in the teacher's ideas prevailing and dominating, unless extraordinary measures are taken. However, in group-based cognitive conflict strategies, agreement has to be reached Out of disagreement by negotiation within the group. In such circumstances, intra-group and inter-group interactions are complex and difficult to predict. Sometimes, a generalized group pressure can cause students to change their views and even their data in order to reach early and easy consensus, thus truncating discussion. Sometimes, a particular individual can exercise a powerful influence on the group's 'findings' that is disproportionate to its scientific value. As in science itself, authority and prestige can play an important role, with the views of the most insistent and prestigious group member being likely to prevail — although, of course, one can only be persistent and insistent if the rest of the group permit it. Social context is rarely a unidirectional influence: individuals contribute to and change the social

contexts in which they find themselves. Thus, interaction between each individual member and the group as a whole is a dynamic, mutually facilitating and constraining one. The 'direction' of the net influence depends, of course, on the particular nature of the group, its composition and the kinds of internal rules and procedures it develops.

Learning interactions within and between groups Within the classroom, individual students, groups of students and the teacher interact to forge a complex classroom culture which sets parameters for all

aspects of classroom life, determining what counts as normal or deviant behaviour. In elaboration of this point, Solomon (1989) suggests that all student behaviours be regarded as 'social acts', in that they have both meaning and purpose for the actor and for others. These acts build into overall 'moral careers' (similar to Claxton's stances) that establish the reputation and direct the behaviour of individual students and student groups. Social acts may have different meanings for different groups, and so the group response to a particular act may vary from group to group. Moreover, the group response to a particular act may change over time, in accordance with changes in the composition of the group, or as group members gain experience and maturity. For example, most teachers and parents are uncomfortably aware of the power of peer group pressures during adolescence, when

the need to feel grown-up frequently makes students dismissive of adult views, opinion and advice (especially from parents and teachers), while eager for peer group approval and support. However, this support is given only under certain conditions — namely, that group norms are obeyed and particular approved roles are adopted and maintained. In other words, the individual's need for peer group approval creates a powerful system of social

rules that ensures peer group loyalty and engenders a large measure of compliance. Often, then, the price of admission to the group is conformity

closely too group or individual an approach who teachers Thus, offence. causes which of transgression conventions, complex by governed are space group and individual Both identity. group of sense and aspirations group's the reflects activities group-based during groups different by occupied space of location and amount the and lesson, the in involvement and approval teacher not) (or seeking their to related is activities individual or whole-class in sit students Where significance. social great of matter a becomes itself space groups, individual the within and whole, a as classroom the Within like. the and groups other with negotiating members, group to sub-tasks — allocating teacher, the with interacting apparatus, up setting and collecting allocated is it tasks the of management the organizes group the how (b) and cohesion, its losing without cope can group the which with sension dis- of amount the (a) determine that emerge rules group time, Over 1989). (Domingos content science of abstraction of level the and tasks learning of demand cognitive of level the lower to unconsciously) (probably tend population (SES) status socio-economic low a with schools in Those school. the of composition social the by influenced strongly be to seems tice prac- pedagogical teachers' Interestingly, students. of groups different with relationships different substantially have may they Consequently, others. than groups student some with comfortable more feel teachers so others, in not but classes, some and groups some in comfortable feel students as Just facilitator. or friend a as another in authority, of source a as act may teachers class, one In class. to class from vary may stances these However, itself. science towards and school towards students, their towards stances lar particu- adopt to keen are Teachers too. building, reputation this of part are teachers Second, met. not or met needs their have and experiences favourable favourable/un- up build they as stance overall their change may groups time, over First, made. be should points further Two on. so and trying not being noticed, being and fuss a making ostentatiously science', at good groups, other of critics as acting understanding, seeking conscientiously by others approval, teacher seeking by reputation their establish to work may groups Some reputations. and characters different their maintain and lish estab- to groups other with and teacher the with interact groups how larly, particu- more and, group a within themselves for role a establish individuals how describes 1993) 1991, 1989, (1987, Solomon articles, of series a In obstacles. additional overcome and pressures social able consider- withstand must so and stereotypes to counter running are science in well do who girls non-threatening; least, at or, supportive classroom the of climate social the find so and stereotypes, to conforming are science through conformity in well do who boys put, Simply science'. at good for drive a creates and advantage teacher's the to works pursuit masculine a as science of perception says, she boys, of groups among while education, science and science to unrelated is that intimacy personal of degree ing increas- an engenders adolescence during girls of groups within conformity and loyalty for demands increasing that remarks (1991) Solomon group. to group from varies conformity that of nature the course, of although, — 77 •

learning of dimensions social some Exploring

78 •

Teaching and learning science

may be resented and, as Solomon (1991) says, individual students who venture into the space of another group may be regarded as 'spies' and may be treated in hostile fashion. Interestingly, some students are allowed to move from group to group, acting as inter-group collaborators and messengers. Solomon (1989) suggests that these are often low status and generally unsuccessful students who are both unimportant to the group's sense of identity and easily manipulated to serve the group's immediate needs. On the other hand, some groups might be flattered to be 'visited' by high status individuals, espedally those whom Claxton (1990) refers to as 'socialites'. Indeed, Shapiro (1994) describes a high status, well liked and high achieving student (Melody) who moved freely from group to group, finding out what other groups had done and what they were currently thinking about as explanations for the phenomena under investigation. Melody, whose actions were in contravention of the teacher's instructions, seemed to learn some difficult concepts in science precisely because she was able to move from group to group. Had she conformed to teacher directives, says Shapiro, she might not have learned so well. Sadly, there are also individuals who are unwanted by all groups and those whose social skills are such that they seem unable to function at all in a group setting. There can, of course, be conflicts between an individual's personal goals and the group's goals. For example, an individual's need for competence and

self-esteem may be in conflict with the group's goals of non-cooperation with the teacher. In these circumstances, seeking the approval of friends is likely to prevail, though it will vary with age. It can also happen that groups become locked into a role that none of the individual members any longer

wishes to have, but feel compelled to maintain for the sake of protecting their hard-won group reputation. Effecting radical change in group stance may require major intervention by the teacher. Changing the group composition is the obvious first strategy, though this can build up resentment against

the teacher. Texts on group learning (for example, Johnson and Johnson 1994; Slavin 1995) have much useful advice for teachers faced with this kind of problem.

Motivating groups Given that the extent to which an individual student participates in group discussion will be determined by that individual's personality variables, attitudes to learning and stock of relevant content knowledge, and by the overall 'climate' of the group — which, in turn, is dependent on the group composition and the nature of the interpersonal relationships within it — it might be possible to predict the factors that lead to successful and productive group-based learning. As might be anticipated, research attention has often been focused on the influence of differences in ability level among students. Within heterogeneous ability groups, it seems that both high and low ability students benefit, especially when the former are encouraged to act as tutors to the latter, while middle range students seem unaffected or even uninvolved

dynamics group by influenced strongly are levels motivational shows, (1992) Gayford as Further, themselves. find students which in group working the of composition the and task the to relation in and time over vary will levels) motivational overall hence, (and, needs basic four these that remembered be should it 6), Chapter (see study they which in ways the concerning choice of measure significant a students giving for argument the reinforces and groups, of composition the and activities learning and teaching of design the concerning teachers for messages important some has work this While (1990). Diaz and Kempa by provided been has speculations these for support empirical Some them. reach to how about instructions clear and goals defined clearly are there which in situations learning prefer may authors) the by students' 'conscientious as (characterized duty-oriented more are who those whereas problem-solving, open-ended and learning self-directed towards incline may curiosity satisfy to need high a with those Similarly, ones. cooperative or non-competitive fer pre- will needs social by mainly driven those while environments, learning competitive prefer will achieve to need high a with those that expected be might it motivation, of typology their in correct are Kempa and Hofstein If people. other with affiliate to need the • duty; a discharge to need the • curiosity; one's satisfy to need the • achieve; to need the • needs: basic four from ways various in compounded argue, they is, that characteristic a pattern', 'motivational their reflect that ways in tasks learning particular to respond students that assert (1985) Kempa and Hofstein work. written their into others of ideas the incorporate to inclined less also were They behaviour. off-task in engage to introverts than likely more were extroverts that apparent was It involvement. the of nature the influence did they study, (1995) Ayob's and Kempa in involvement group of extent the determine to seem not did level) extrovert versus introvert crude the (at variables personality While students. other by discussion group to contributed been had items information of cent per 40 some which in work written independently produced students, active overtly more other like they, because dialogue internal of kind some in engaging and listening been have must they uninvolved, be to appeared students some though even that conclude authors The role. spectator a than more no have to appear they which in activities therein, activities the from and membership their from benefit group the in inactive seemingly students those Even behaviour. within-group to unrelated sometimes is learning of extent that found (1995) Ayob and Kempa Interestingly, behaviour). on-task than

rather social towards inclined are they (because boys than numbers larger much in present are they when also and ignored) be to tend they (because boys by outnumbered heavily are they when disadvantaged being girls with significant, be also can group the of composition gender The 1984). (Webb 79 •

learning of dimensions social some Exploring

80 •

Teaching and learning science

in particular, by leadership style. Students in groups with more 'democratic' or 'negotiated' styles of working often have higher motivational levels and gain greater all-round understanding than those in groups where an indi—

vidual student assumes a leadership or directive role. Furthermore, Kempa and Ayob (1991) have shown that even when confronting the same task, groups vary enormously in the amount of verbal interaction and in the distribution of contributions. Considerably greater consistency between groups is found

in the form of interactions (most tend to be dialogues, even in groups with more than two members) and in the 'content' of discussion, which is predominantly concerned with redudng interpersonal tension, maintaining group cohesion and establishing working procedures (see also Pugh and Lock 1989). Wallace (1986) identifies six different kinds of talk, each with a different purpose, occurring at different stages of a learning activity. These purposes are:

1 Negotiating and managing the various tasks. 2 Removing tensions. 3 Giving help and tutoring. 4 Non-task talk concerned with social relations. 5 Negotiating perception (agreeing/disagreeing about observations). 6 Constructing meaning.

While, at first sight, it might be tempting to believe that students should spend all or most of their time in category 3 and category 6 talk, it is clear, on further reflection, that without substantial talk in categories 1, 2 and 4 no work at all would be possible. Category 5 talk is particularly interesting. It seems that students need confirmation of what they have observed, and reassurance about what they have measured, from peers and/or from teachers. New effects are sometimes difficult to perceive, even to see, and are often difficult to relate to an existing scheme of understanding. Without social reinforcement, none of us knows whether to 'believe our own eyes' (Solomon 1991: 103). Significantly, category 6 talk is the rarest, and seems to decline further when groups are unsupervised for long periods (Kempa and Ayob 1991). Even when talk is directed towards cognitive matters, it is generally at a fairly low level of sophistication — simple recall and transmission of information, for example. Effective discussion and the free exchange of ideas and

criticism that help to build and develop understanding are both rare and uncertain events. Sometimes meaning is established tentatively and hesitantly, sometimes by bold assertions, as group members talk directly and indirectly about the topic in hand. Sometimes the hoped-for understanding doesn't emerge, because of the group's need for reaching early and easy consensus. Teachers can help matters by better structuring of tasks and by assisting students to acquire the skills to participate more effectively in group

activities (see texts on group learning). What is clear above all, however, is that much more research in this area is needed before our knowledge is secure enough to inform a theory of pedagogy. It is also clear that this research must be sensitive to what may be very significant cultural differences.

of regardless language, preferred or first student's the of influence powerful the reveal understanding conceptual children's of studies Cross-cultural society. Polynesian in significance of all are maintained, is contact eye whether higher, is head whose stands, who and sits who child, a approaches teacher a closely how example, For class. in contributions and work children's to responses and tasks of allocation distribution, and type question contact, eye language, body and gesture inflexion), and tone address, of forms (especially language to attention pay to need teachers respect, this In racist. inadvertently and unconsciously even or inappropriate, culturally be may interaction teacher—student of styles Certain actions. and remarks teachers' by groups ethnic particular to veyed con- messages' of kinds all be can there classroom, the Within song. and story-telling of use extensive the in reflected is culture Maori of tradition oral strong The accomplishment. individual rewarding of principle Western usual more the replaces ments achieve- and efforts group of recognition and expected, is learning Cooperative relationship. relatives) (elder—younger tuakana-teina traditional the on based tutoring peer of form a employ to teachers enables classroom each within present range age wide The 1994). (May structure family) (extended whanau a on based pedagogy Maori preferred a for guidelines of set a articulate to notion this used have educators Maori radical example, for Zealand, New In 1994). (Pomeroy style learning in preferences determined culturally are there that claim the in validity some be to seem does there themselves, in racist potentially considered be therefore, may, and stereotyping on verge to seem distinctions of kinds these While individualism. and competition of values Euro-American the on based system education an in success for quired re- aspirations and attitudes the and cooperation on emphasis Polynesian traditional the between conflict be may there addition, In 21). 1985: (Jones disrespect' and attention of lack of sign a be can question a ask to Indeed, students. mere by questioned not respected, be to is such as and knowledge valuable holds pastor, or priest the like teacher, the that parents their from learned have Zealand. New in students Polynesian for exist may lems prob- Similar schools. British and Canadian in students many for problem a — teacher male adult, an of it) see they (as authority the challenging in difficulty experience tradition Islamic an within up brought girls Many

experience. home his from world different entirely an to belongs often experience school child's The behaviour. good of hall-mark a as heard not but seen being on premium a put may home the curiosity, and ing question- ideas, of exchange the talking, encourages school the Whilst perspective: African

an from issue this on comments 12) (1980: Durojaiye audience. and speaker between distinguish don't which activities group in participate to willing more are They teacher. the by questioning direct answer or role leadership a take others, of front in alone speak to required when participate to willing less are Americans Native states, (1995) Krugly-Smolska as example, For 81 •

learning of dimensions social some Exploring

82 •

Teaching and learning science

the language of instruction (Ross and Sutton 1982; Baker and Taylor 1995).' Even more significant is the influence of local knowledge, custom and ritual. In some instances, the concepts of science seem almost incompatible with

knowledge acquired by the student through membership of other social groups. For example, Kawasaki (1996) describes the difficulty for Japanese students in reconciling the Western concept of 'nature' with its closest (but significantly different) Japanese equivalent of 'shizen'. In elementary school, the goal of fostering a love of nature is consistent with the Japanese shizen, but secondary school biology, which regards the natural environment as an object of study and mastery, is not. On occasions, differences between local knowledge and scientific knowledge are located at the level of fundamental beliefs about the nature of the external world and humanity's place in it, discussion of which is continued in Chapter 11.

Personal learning contexts Accepting the notion of a personal framework of understanding (developed in Chapter 5) means accepting the view that each learner is in possession of a unique array of ideas, beliefs, feelings, values and expectations, within which, of course, are elements held in common with others. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the social contexts in which learners find themselves, including classrooms, create additional opportunities for extending this personal framework of understanding, while simultaneously imposing constraints and limitations on individual action. Just as each student's personal framework of understanding is unique, so also is each student's complex of social group membership and perceptions of what that membership entails and requires. In other words, in addition to building a personal framework of cognitive understanding, students construct and reconstruct their own social reality as they move and act in various social settings. Bronfenbrenner (1979) describes an individual's social settings in terms of four nested and mutually interacting systems. • A micro system — the individual's immediate social settings of family, friends

and school. • A meso system — the relationships among these micro systems (e.g. parent—

school interactions). a set of social systems that facilitate or constrain activities

• The exo system —

within and between the micro and meso systems (e.g. local regulations and guidelines for practice, media and religious influences). • The macro system — the overarching regulatory institutions (educational, legal and political systems).

Families, peers and school groups provide different contexts for social interaction. Because these groups are embedded within other, wider, social and subcultural groupings and institutions, which are, in turn, influenced by still

higher order cultural contexts, a complex network of influence, feedback and control is established that both creates and restricts opportunities for

learning. good with interferes that baggage' considerable it with brings countries) developing in students many for English, (usually language second a in science learn to necessity the that case the also is It

1

Note identical. seem may others to that circumstances despite others, on not but occasions, some on learn may students particular why explain to helps It circumstances. similar very apparently in even not, do ability equal apparently of others while successfully, learn students some why explain to helps contexts learning personal of uniqueness the of Appreciation student. each for fashion unique in combine elements these all how and teacher, the and students other science, learning, view they how topic, the about feel students way the into insight an having involves also It studied. being topic particular the about have students individual understanding cognitive the of aware being than more requires facilitation Successful teacher. the facing task complex the is learning successful facilitate that ways in intervene to order in uniqueness its to contributing factors the Understanding vidual. indi- each for created is context learning unique a group), learning or class particular a (involving context educational distinctive a within set task ing learn- particular a with presented are understanding, of framework personal distinctive a with each students, when that is here argued being is What effort? the worth it is short, In conventions? new to conform to or values change to requirement a as such demands, other there Are members? group other the with well reasonably on get I Do in? placed be I will group learning Which care? I Do friends? parents, teachers, with relationship my affect failure or success will How target? the reaching in succeed to likely I am effort, the make I If do? to expected I am what words, other In determined? be success will How activities? other for opportunities of restriction and time of terms in costs the are What aspirations? and needs short-term or long-term my meet to likely it Is interesting? task the Is answered. and asked, are questions of number A proceed. to how decide they which through and intuitive, or tacit is which of much analysis, benefit cost— of kind a in engage task learning a with presented students 6, Chapter in discussed As behaviour. learning about making decision short-term ence influ- and lesson-specific, even topic-specific, are Others science. learning to commitment and attitude overall student's the govern they time; over stable and wide-ranging are elements Some values. and aspirations self-image, awareness; metacognitive of aspects other and preferences learning family; and teachers peers, with relationships science; learning with associated ies activit- the and science school, of views student's the are: learning science to orientation personal this to contributing elements many the Among learning'. science to orientation a calls (1992) Shapiro what to contributing behaviour, learning ing determin- in factors significant become systems interacting four these about feels and perceives individual an which in ways the Moreover, learning. 83 •

learning of dimensions social some Exploring

•••8 Science education as enculturation

In Chapter 7, I argued that the learner cannot be separated from the sociocultural milieu in which learning occurs. While the cognitive nature of the learning task and the scientific context in which it is located are both crucial factors influencing learning, they are bound together by an acting person who is uniquely located both socially and historically. Moreover, in most school learning situations, that 'acting person' is engaged in social interactions with others who are also uniquely located, and these interactions are themselves part

of the construction of the learner's social identity. Consequently, the nature of the group changes as a consequence of the interactions within it. In short, learning is a complex, uncertain and socioculturally located activity. Its complexity can only be appreciated, and appropriate steps taken to facilitate better learning for all, by adopting a model of teaching and learning that recognizes the uniqueness of individual learners, includes the sociocultural contexts in which the individual is located and takes account of the complex nature of the interactions between the individual and the other elements in the learning context (the teacher, other students, learning materials etc.). Building such a model involves 'raiding' other areas of research and scholarship for appropriate intellectual and theoretical resources. The most promising area in which to commence this 'raiding' is the sociocultural theorizing of Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky's work was rooted in his concern to understand the social context of cognitive development and, in particular, the role of language in the development of higher cognitive functions. These functions, says Vygotsky, originate in social activity and, as they develop, are inextricably linked with language, which is itself a social construct. It is through social interactions — initially with parents or other care givers, family members and peers, later via teachers and other knowledgeable adults — that children learn the cognitive and communicative tools and skills of their culture. From the very first days of the child's development his activities acquire a meaning of their own in a system of social behavior and, being directed

and speech that is position Vygotsky's structures. cognitive underlying eral, gen- more of development the from following symbols using of ways other and language with primary, is action that view Piagetian the to contrast stark in is This speech. of importance the is greater the argued, Vygotsky problem, the complex more the fact, In 26). 1978: (Vygotsky states he hands', and eyes their as well as speech, their of help the with tasks practical solve problem-solving: for tool a as language use to come children which in ways the of recognition is insights greatest Vygotsky's Among 6) 1978: Scribner and (Cole development. individual of forms later and early between bridge the forms and transformations behavioral about brings systems sign produced culturally of internalization The development cultural its of level the and society of form the with change and history human of course the over societies by created are systems) number writing, (language, systems sign systems, tool Like .

.

.

commentary. following the in apparent be should 2) (Chapter science of dependence theory the and understanding of framework personal a of notion the ideas, Vygotsky's among relationships The used. is it which in society human the shapes and reflects both and processes thinking the organizes thought, of possibility the creates language tool, a As role. key a plays language which in process a is It internalization. is psychological the becomes social the which by process the for term Vygotsky's herself. or himself on act to finally, and, others on act to begins child the third, her; or him around those with interactions into enters child the then child, the on act people other first, steps: four prises com- plane psychological internal to plane social external from path The 57) 1978: (Vygotsky

individuals. human between

relations actual as originate functions higher the All (intrapsychological) child the inside then and (interpsychological), people between first, level; individual the on later, and level, social the on first, twice: appears development cultural child's the in function Every it. within place take that interactions the of nature the at and located is child the which in world social immediate the at also but argue), constructivists (as world physical external the with interaction her or his and individual the at only not look must we Vygotsky, says psychological, the explain to order in Thus,

30) 1978: (Vygotsky history. social and individual between links the in rooted deeply process developmental a of product the is structure human complex This person. another through passes object to child from and child to object from path The environment. child's the of prism the through refracted are purpose, definite a towards 85 •

enculturation as education Science

86 •

Teaching and learning science

thought are initially independent of each other: there is a pre-intellectual phase in speech development and a pre-verbal phase in the development of thought. During early childhood, speech and thought processes begin to penetrate each other: children first use telegraphic or egocentric speech to accompany problem-solving, describing verbally what they are doing as they are doing it. Next, they use speech to plan problem-solving strategies, again verbalizing as they proceed with the task in hand in an apparent attempt to

guide their own behaviour. In the early stages of language development, children act as though they believe that if speech is to direct behaviour it must be spoken. Eventually, as the child grows older and gains experience, speech goes 'underground', transforming into a kind of internal speech, an inner dialogue for the construction and reconstruction of meaning. What had started out as an external socially constructed artefact is transformed by the child, first into an external aid to help organize problem-solving, later into the very constructive core of thought itself. The construction of mean-

ing through language goes on throughout our lives, building up an ever more complex view of reality, largely through linguistic exchanges with other people — either directly or indirectly, via books, movies etc. In summary, the

development of complex mental functions involves two unique yet connected processes: mastery of the external means of thinking, such as speech,

writing and mathematical notation; and learning to use those symbols to master, regulate and develop one's thinking.

Scaffolding and the zone of proximal development Vygotsky was highly critical of the Piagetian view that learning must necessarily lag behind development — that is, the view that learning cannot occur until and unless the appropriate cognitive structures are in place to enable experience to be appropriately represented and acted upon. Vygotsky's counter suggestion is that, in general, children do function according to norms of development, as Piaget alleges, but it is incorrect to say that they function only at a particular level. With appropriate assistance, he says, 8-year-old children can solve problems at the level of a 9-year-old, or even a 12-year-old.

This difference between twelve and eight, or between nine and eight, is what we call the zone of proximal development. It is the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers. (Vygotsky 1978: 86)

In Vygotsky's view, teachers should concentrate their efforts in the zone of proximal development. Instruction should lead development, providing opportunities for students to engage in and acquire competence in intellectual functions that are on the verge of development. The problem with learning

memory, collective this of elements acquiring By years. many over up built memory collective of form a constitute language and practices skills, ledge, Know- assimilation. of notion Piaget's to alternative sociocultural the as tion appropria- of notion the introduced Leont'ev work, Vygotsky's on Building

enculturation as Education 60). 1983: (Bruner own' its on stand can structure reciprocal the as part by part. scaffold the removes then and intervention, appropriate by rescued be can ineptitudes child's the that ensure to scaffold a provides game, the sets 'One participant'. a be now there let spectator, a was there before 'Where call: rallying the with scaffolds of removal gradual this up sums Bruner ing. understand- of framework current learner's each to teacher the of part the on sensitivity requires responsibility, more need they when and ready, are learners when Judging independence. intellectual for curriculum a building of aspect critical a is development, learner's the to response in scaffolding of nature the changing by hand-over, effective and smooth a Planning control. of hand-over a be to has There assistance. adult of scaffold the on dependent forever remain don't students that course, of important, is It 'shaping'. of notion behaviourist the from crucially differs it sense that In possible. otherwise not tasks of accomplishment the permits and student the of range lectual intel- the extends it support, providing By assistance. graduated through tion participa- learner's the of level the adjusting while constant task the holds it Rather, learner. the for task the of nature the alter doesn't Scaffolding 24—5) 1985: (Bruner control. conscious for tool a into it convert and knowledge external internalize to word, Vygotsky's in child, the for possible it make to task learning the 'scaffolding' of function critical the performs effect in tutor the point, that to Up tool. a as it use to able is he that then is it system, conceptual or function new a over control conscious that achieves child the When control. and consciousness own his through action own his master to able is learner the as time a such until consciousness of form vicarious a as learner the serves peer aiding the or tutor the then peer, competent more a or adult an of tutelage the under being by advance to enabled is child the If

them. of control take and use to students for opportunities create to and development' of advance 'in ideas present to teachers enabling role, crucial a plays (1976), al. et Wood by used first term a scaffolding, that development proximal of zone the in is It maturing'. of stage a in are which functions life to rouses and 'awakens it because ment', develop- of advance in is which that 'is 89), (1978: Vygotsky says learning', good only 'The processes. mental developing child's the behind permanently lags it that is problem-solving independent of level child's the to only geared 87 •

enculturation as education Science

88 • Teaching and learning science

and learning how and when to use them, individuals are inducted into the cultural resources of society — in effect, being admitted into the community of practitioners and empowered to employ its resources as their own. Thus, individual development is shaped as much by cultural as by biological factors, as much by social factors as by individual effort. 'Humans' mental processes

acquire a structure necessarily tied to the sociohistorically formed means and methods transmitted to them by others in the process of collaborative labor and social interaction' (Leont'ev 1981: 56). In saying that learners appropriate understanding through social encounters, the point is being made that knowledge, skills and language have a social history and carry with them a cargo of sociocultural meaning and political significance. More expert others — teachers, family members, other adults and, sometimes, peers — play an essential role in the individual's ability to appropriate the cultural resources of the group. Not only do they provide a model of proper behaviour, they are also able to assist and guide the novice to go beyond what he or she can accomplish unaided. Here, again, language plays a key role. As Bruner (1971: 20) stated, some quartercentury ago, 'one of the most crucial ways in which a culture provides aid in intellectual growth is through a dialogue between the more experienced and the less experienced.' Unlike Piagetian theory, in which teachers seem to be reduced to a largely peripheral role as the provider and manager of a suitable environment in which learning subsequently occurs, Vygotskian theory gives teachers a cent-

ral role: leading children and students to new levels of conceptual understanding through social interaction. For Vygotsky, teaching comprises the activities associated with enabling the learner to participate effectively in the activities of the more expert, and learning is seen as enculturation via guided

participation and modelled practice. Expert performance is modelled and learners are instructed and supported in their efforts to replicate it. Initially, considerable responsibility lies with the expert (the teacher), while the novices (students) perform only those aspects of the various tasks of which they are currently capable. Extensive guidance and support are provided for those aspects which are just beyond the students' current unaided capability. Over time, through assisted performance, the novices master all the component parts and gradually become capable of full and autonomous participation. As Vygotsky himself put it, what the child can do today, with help, she or he will manage alone tomorrow. Responsibility is gradually transferred from expert to (the former) novice until such time as the student is intellectually independent and no longer needs the teacher. Translating these general ideas about enculturation into effective classroom practice requires more careful consideration of two key questions.

1 What do students need to know in order to be regarded as successfully enculturated? In other words, what is involved in moving from a commonsense understanding to a sdentific understanding of natural phenomena and events?

an to concepti scientific a [of relationship 'the words: 93) (1962: Vygotsky's In theories. different in different be may that role a models), and ories (the- structures conceptual within play they role the in located is meaning real their defined, unambiguously and carefully often are terms scientific While structures. such other to relationships particular have that structures conceptual within located are science in concepts contrast, By unremarked. go will they recognized, are they if or, unrecognized go often will sistencies incon- context-specific, highly often is use its because Indeed, tolerated. are contradictions and inconsistencies most met, adequately is function this provided and, communication easy permit to is role Its interaction. social through experiences common of understanding mutual but ence', evid- 'hard of criticism and consideration rigorous the not is basis rational Its theories. of set coherent and consistent a than rather items planatory ex- and descriptive of collection hoc ad or piecemeal a comprise to tends therefore, knowledge, Everyday contexts. between and across relationships conceptual establishing for need little is there contexts, specific to tailored and action-oriented experiential, largely is knowledge everyday Because specificity. context of level high the and inconsistency and ambiguity of tolerance the definitions, clear of absence the are science') 'everyday cluding (in- understanding everyday of kinds most of characteristics the Among function. own its and place own its has 'sciences' these of each science', 'everyday of body overall the Within 1991). (Lucas fantasy part and pseudoscience part science, part is that talk' 'science media-influenced of kind the and science' 'street knowledge, traditional of elements with together categories, Claxton's of both denote to label catch-all a as used be will understanding' 'everyday term the chapter, this in discussion of purpose the For 114).' 1993: (Claxton spot' the on put are they when together 'cobble students that alizations ration- the given being as much as events and phenomena of knowledge working students' into insight gaining be not may they ideas their express to students ask researchers when says, he Consequently, 1988). Gazzaniga also (see them with dealings non-verbal our guides and informs which that from different often is events and phenomena of explanations verbal to leading understanding that grounds the on distinction this draws He experiences. media mass and interaction social through acquired science', 'lay and ences, experi- physical direct through acquired science', 'gut calls he what tween be- distinguishes (1993) Claxton explanations. and descriptions scientific accepted from respects of number a in differ that events and phenomena natural about views and ideas established well some with lessons science school to come students that seems it 4, and 3 Chapters in discussed As

science to sense common From understanding? scientific to sense common from shift the effecting for agogy ped- appropriate an is what words, other In occur? enculturation does How 89 •

2

enculturation as education Science

90 •

Teaching and learning science

object is mediated from the start by some other concept . the very notion of a scientific concept implies a certain position in relation to other concepts, i.e., a place within a system of concepts.' While the standards of validity for everyday understanding are easily met by context-specific meaning located in practical action, science seeks more .

universal meaning through abstraction. Science isn't just about 'making (personal) sense of the world', it is about producing objective knowledge of the world that others can use.2 As Matthews (1993a) points out, there is an important distinction to be drawn between the theoretical objects of science (concepts, principles and theories) and the real objects, materials, events and phenomena that scientists study and are able to study more closely and more productively because of the abstract and mathematical nature of scientific thought and the community-based rationality of scientific methods of inquiry.

Some characteristics of scientific knowledge The following piece of scientific knowledge is typical of the kind of knowledge students are expected to acquire at the upper levels of a school chemistry course. It has a number of features that can be taken as characteristic of scientific knowledge in general.

The temperature falls when ammonium chloride dissolves in water because the combined enthalpies of hydration of the ammonium and chloride ions is less than the lattice energy of ammonium chloride. First, it is expressed in very specialized language. The language of science includes words purpose-built for particular contexts, sometimes using Latin and Greek roots. In general, these words present few difficulties for students because teachers introduce them carefully and pay particular attention to clarifying their meaning. Much more problematic are dozens of common words (like contract, efficient and abundant) that are either not understood or understood as having the opposite meaning: about 50 per cent of 12— 14-year-olds take contract to mean 'get bigger' and abundant to mean 'scarce', while efficient is often taken to mean 'sufficient' (Cassels and Johnstone 1985). Science also makes use of common everyday words, but uses them in a restricted or very specialized way. Words like force, energy and work spring

to mind. Often, it is these words that cause learning problems because students think that they understand them, but do not always appreciate the particular specialized scientific meaning, and when its use is appropriate or necessary. As if all this wasn't confusing enough for students, scientists in different disciplines sometimes use the same word to mean entirely different things: consider, for example, cell, nucleus and molar as used by biologists and chemists.

concepts, theoretical abstract of terms in think teachers and experiences crete con- of terms in think students When equations. algebraic or chemical as is, that — form symbol in data observational representing on insistence an early too by created be can problems greater Even students. to unfamiliar and strange often are that terms theoretical abstract in expressed are observed events or phenomena the for explanations and descriptions that demanding yet work), (laboratory experiences concrete rich visually providing by lem prob- the compound sometimes teachers Unfortunately, learn. to difficult so science makes that factors the of one is knowledge scientific of abstraction of level high the nature, counter-intuitive sometimes its with Together science. theoretical of characteristic descriptions ematical) math- sometimes (and idealized abstract, the to events and phenomena of descriptions of set based empirically commonsense, a from move crucial the make to how is teachers for problem The problem. to problem or context, to context from somewhat shift may meaning course, of which, in tems, sys- conceptual interconnected via concepts other with connections their in located is understanding provide to concepts of power The correlations. for search a and inquiry experimental via study systematic more to subjected be can events and phenomena abstraction, and idealization Through control. to susceptible and understandable manageable, more made and reduced is world the of diversity and complexity the building, theory scientific In 130). 1994: (Matthews debate' theoretical in evidence or data become and guises everyday their of stripped are they that event scientific a as is events to events natural enable system theoretical a of It scientific become science. about learning of part vital a and ledge, techniques and concepts know- scientific of nature distinctive the understanding to central is that tion recogni- this is It interpret. and model idealize, we which of means by device enabling an is it Rather, them. of observation naive the from derive it does nor studied, being objects the create not does Theory study. scientific to susceptible become to phenomena and events natural enable that system theoretical a of concepts abstract the is It power. explanatory particular its knowledge ific scient- gives that abstraction of level high the is it and itself, science of goal major a course, of also, is building) theory (scientific abstractions these tween be- relationships for search the and abstraction increasing of development The science. learning and teaching of goal major a be should acquisition their Consequently, abstraction. of levels lower with concepts are than situations new with dealing in useful more and forgetting) to resistant more is, (that stable more are abstraction of levels high with concepts (1968), Ausubel to According abstraction. of hierarchy a ascend to is intention our but on, so and activities laboratory through objects, real familiar with interaction in children engage initially may We progress. learners as abstract increasingly becomes it Indeed, knowledge. abstract is knowledge scientific Third, on. so and hydration bonding, ionic solubility, of understanding an requires chloride ammonium about statement the Understanding theory-impregnated. is science of guage lan- the 2, Chapter in argued As understanding. conceptual of measure able consider- a necessitates science of language the of use proper Second, .

.

.

enculturation as education Science

91 •

92 •

Teaching and learning science

they are, in effect, 'speaking different languages'. As a consequence, much of the laboratory work in school science does little to help to build students' understanding (Hodson 1993c). Similar problems may arise from the use of analogies, similes, metaphors and over-simplified versions of a theoretical model by teachers to 'get the point across' more easily and more quickly. Osborne (1996) has argued that Harre's notion of three 'levels' of theory might be helpful in assisting students to ascend the level of abstraction towards sophisticated theoretical understanding. Level 1 theories are concerned with describing and classifying tangible, directly observable entities. Level 2 theories concern entities that are only accessible to our senses through

instrumentation or are, in principle, observable. Level 3 theories deal with theoretical entities for which there is no direct evidence. Osborne's suggestion is not for an invariable teaching progression in which students are first introduced to a simple conceptual language to describe events and phenomena, proceed to theoretical structures that relate these observations in cause and effect relationships and finally learn to use abstract systems. Rather,

he is emphasizing the need to impress on students that the sophisticated theories of science ultimately rest on directly and indirectly observable events,

and he is making a case for a much more overt teaching about science and its epistemology.

Learning about science Although it is quite common to assert that education in science is concerned with the progressive disembedding of thought and the promotion of context-free generalized understanding, it is important to point out that what distinguishes scientific thought from everyday thought is not contextdisembeddedness in the sense of being unrelated to contexts, but in the sense of transcending contexts. It is the high level of abstraction and idealization that renders scientific concepts applicable to many particular problems and contexts (Matthews 1994). Scientific knowledge is also characterized by its coherence and interrelatedness. Much everyday knowledge is found wanting when subjected to the scientific demands for such characteristics as coherence, consistency, precision, robustness, parsimony and predictive capability.

Next, as discussed earlier, scientific knowledge is that which has been subjected to, and has survived, critical scrutiny by members of the connnun-

ity of scientists, using whatever methods and criteria have been deemed appropriate to ensure the necessary degree of validity and reliability. In other words, it is both personally and socially constructed: personally constructed in the sense that individual scientists devise theoretical constructs and impose them on physical entities in order to study and explain them; socially con-

structed in the sense that once these constructs have been agreed by the community as constituting valid knowledge, they are taken for granted until there are good grounds for doubting them. It is the demand for consensus within the community of scientists, and the struggle of individual scientists

decisions makes who someone as regarded is person scientific genuinely a Thus, facts. observed the with agreement evidence, empirical be to taken always is evidence course, Of validity. about making decision into intrude, not do scientists individual of prejudices idiosyncratic the (c) and made; are decisions before considered carefully is evidence all (b) evidence; of weight the to according judged be can validity their until sceptically treated are claims knowledge all (a) that: ensure that attitudes scientific these is it that alleged is It communality. and integrity intellectual judgement, suspend to willingness open-mindedness, rationality, objectivity, intelligence, superior induding butes, attri- and attitudes of cluster particular a possess all themselves scientists that and science of pursuit successful the for essential are attitudes and acteristics char- personal particular that asserted commonly is It 1992). Rao Bhaskara 1984; (Schibeci development curriculum science of rhetoric the in priority high a has attitudes' 'scientific of inculcation the that doubt no is There book. this of scope the outside is that debate a — on so and them distorts or reflects education science whether be, should they what are, values these what about debate much course, of is, There 1975). Nunan and (Smolicz pivots' 'ideological as and 1980) Hukins and (Gauld attitudes' 'scientific as teachers science to familiar are They values. underlying of set a to — implicitly often more explicitly, sometimes — committed become individuals munity, com- scientific the of member a becoming by Furthermore, validity. located historically its retains it another, by displaced be subsequently may idea an though even and history, a has science words, other In scientists. vious pre- of knowledge the on builds it cumulative, is knowledge scientific Thus, others. to available made is and community scientific the of record written the of part becomes whatever) or technique instrumental procedure, mental experi- theory, (model, item knowledge the judgement, and evaluation of methods public these using community, the by scrutiny critical survives it If power. economic or political of exercise the than rather dialogue critical from result must excluded or included is what — authority intellectual of equality be must There • practice.

and theory of evaluation for standards recognized publicly be must There • it. on act must it dissent; tolerate merely than more do to needs community the — criticism of uptake be must There • criticism. for forums recognized publicly be must There • opinion. mere than rather knowledge as count to is consensus if meet must practitioners of community a that conditions four identifies (1994) Longino judgement. of criteria stated clearly and methods characterized well employing by consensus achieve who community, scientific the of members by scrutiny critical rigorous survive to has knowledge scientific justification, its for knower the of authority personal the or consensus simple beyond little needs which knowledge, everyday Unlike authority. of kind particular its with knowledge scientific invests that reliability, and validity of criteria community-based the meet to 93 •

enculturation as education Science

94 •

Teaching and learning science

solely in terms of a dispassionate weighing of the empirical evidence (the facts). The extent to which this reflects real scientific practice is a matter of some controversy; the extent to which this image of science should be projected through the curriculum is also a matter of debate. A further matter for debate is whether Smolicz and Nunan (1975) are correct in their characterization of science and science education as being predicated on four ideological pivots: • The anthropocentric view — man (their word) as conqueror and controller of nature. • The principle of quantification and demystification — science as a rational

process for obtaining illuminative information about the world through precise measurement. • Positivistic faith — faith in the continued advance of technology through the application of an infallible scientific method based on observation and experiment. • The analytic ideal — the assumption that the whole is best understood by

a study of its component parts.

Argument about whether these are the ideals that underpin both science and science education, whether they should be and whether other ideals should be promoted instead continues to occupy many science educators around the world, but space precludes further discussion here (however, see Chapter 11 for a related discussion). In summary, enculturation into science involves more than just changing specific conceptions from the commonsense to the scientifically approved views. It involves recognition of the need for coherent universal meanings, precision, parsimony and consistency with other theories and explanations. It entails a change in 'explanatory preferences': away from surface features and readily observable characteristics towards abstraction; away from local, context-bound meaning towards universal, context-transcendent meaning. Or, if not a change in 'explanatory preferences', an understanding of why

scientists have these preferences and an awareness of when and how to employ them for oneself. It involves an understanding of the rationality of role and status of scientific knowledge, the nature of scientific inquiry (especially the relationships of observation, theory and experiment) and the criteria of scientific validity. It involves an appreciation of the history of the scientific endeavour and major scientific ideas. It includes a commitment to a set of values and an ability to use appropriately a specialized mode of communication. Munby (1980) sums up these capabilities in his notion of intellectual independence: the capacity of an individual to judge the truth of a knowledge claim independently of other people, and to exercise similar independent judgement with respect to views about science and scientific practice. Kuhn (1989) expresses similar views when she describes those enculturated into science as capable of: consciously articulating the theories they hold; knowing what evidence supports them or would refute them; justifying why they science — the

68). 1991: (Lave practice' community ongoing to access legitimate on depends which participation, centripetal increasingly of process social a through oldtimers become 'Newcomers latter. the to meaning giving and shaping motivating, former the with process, same the of part are skilful and knowledgeable more becoming and community the of member a as identity an Developing practice. of community a of member a becoming of process the is it skills, and knowledge internalizing of process a just not is apprenticeship Lave, For participants.' peripheral legitimate, as them with it doing by well, something do who people with ways knowledgeable increasingly in interact and act, argue, think, to learn 'Apprentices says: 2) (1988: Lave As useful. is ticeship appren- of notion the that here is It enculturated. already someone of ance guid- and support the need students discourse, of mode and judgement of criteria values, standards, procedures, its science, of structures conceptual the into enculturation of matter a largely is science about and in education If

science to sense common from change the Effecting science. about learning and teaching with concern overt more a words, other in knowledge; scientific of status and role the about teaching explicit more require may scientists among found coherence conceptual of kind the towards meaning of framework personal student's a of evolution that follows also It science. in learning successful to favourable more attitudes and content scientific of learning better about bringing for science of ology soci- and philosophy history, the in studies of importance the to point does it Nevertheless, on. so And views? epistemological different with associated be tests attainment of kinds other in success Would research? this in used were tests attainment of kinds What means. competence' 'physics what of question the unanswered leaves and physics', in well 'doing as counts what of question the begs it course, Of competence. physics in growth by itated facil- are and facilitate sake own its for learning valuing and remembering just than rather understanding of task a as learning approaching physics, learn to ability one's in confidence that found also They 165). 1992: Posner and (Strike relativism' cultural reject to and method, scientific of views their in empiricists be to beliefs, their in consistency demand to physics, about realists be to inclined more were physics in well did who 'students particular, In science. of learning their by affected are and affect attitudes and views epistemological students' that found (1992) Posner and Strike Similarly, knowledge. conceptual of role the about interviews in express they views the reflects problem-solving in knowledge conceptual use dents stu- which in ways the that observed has (1994) Hammer Interestingly, 1989: (Kuhn it' by influenced being merely than rather evidence, about thinking and them, with merely than rather theories, about 'thinking issues: epistemological of awareness metacognitive in rooted is bestows enculturation that expertise scientific the sense, a In evidence. the explain also might that views other some than rather views those hold 95 •

enculturation as education Science

96 •

Teaching and learning science

When they are given opportunities to participate peripherally in the activities of the community, newcomers pick up the relevant social language, imitate the behaviour of skilled and knowledgeable members and gradually start to act in accordance with community norms. However, for Lave, there is no formal didactic role for the experts or skilled practitioners. By contrast, Rogoff (1990) proposes a more formal, instruction-oriented apprenticeship model, in which novices are systematically coached, guided and supported by expert practitioners. 'Guided participation', as she calls it, depends on com-

munication and negotiation between teacher and learner about what new knowledge or skill is needed and how it can be made compatible with existing understanding and capability. Children and their social partners build bridges from children's current understanding to reach new understanding through processes inherent in communication. They structure problem solving in a way that provides children with a level of support and challenge that comfortably stretches their skills . . Guided participation involves transfer of responsibility for handling more complex features of a problem as children develop skill and is, hence, a dynamic process of structuring and supporting development. .

(Rogoff This

1991: 351)

approach, and the several other variations on cognitive apprenticeship

are rooted in Vygotskian theory (see Tharp and Gallimore 1988; Brown eta!. 1989; Newman eta!. 1989), involve teachers in providing guidance and coaching through the careful arrangement of appropriate curriculum materials and learning tasks (scaffolding), through modelling and demonstrating good practice, and through both tacit and explicit instruction as they participate in joint learning activities and problem-solving with apprentices/students. Teachers' greater knowledge and skills enable them to assist students in applying familiar knowledge in unfamiliar contexts and employing unfamiliar knowledge in familiar contexts. In addition, teachers' expertise with the established discourse (of science) enables them to support students in their attempts to master it. that

Scaffolding strategies The most appropriate form of scaffolding depends, of course, on the nature

of the task, the learners and the situation. It also changes with time, as learners gain experience with the task. Early scaffolding steps are largely a matter of task induction or 'learner recruitment': finding connections between what is to be learned and what students already know and have experienced, establishing a context that is meaningful and relevant to the students, gaining their interest and commitment, identifying similarities and differences between the new situation and the old and ensuring that terminology is properly understood. Much of this can be achieved by teachers

posing relevant and well structured questions, by reminding students of previous work, or by showing a video or presenting a demonstration.

learning of part important an is required, is it when and required, is ance assist- teacher of kind what Knowing it. in engagement through developed is that knowledge the and activity learning the both co-construct students and teachers way, another it put To assist. to teacher the assist students words, other In sub-tasks. specific allocating and task the structuring for responsibility assume students course), of students, to taught be to has that else (something questioning skilful increasingly Through student. the by directed and guided now is teacher the by guided formerly was what and required, when and as support as acting teacher the with control, increasing assumes learner The participation. teacher of extent and nature the of ation negoti- a is there determines, teacher the when and as guidance teacher ing receiv- simply learners of Instead completion. or clarification task for needed is feel they that help the elicit to encouraged are students when begins — learner the to responsibility ceding — scaffolding 3 phase in step first The scaffolding. as regarded be also could condition this meeting Thus, orientation. learning a of adoption for condition essential an is answers)' correct or evaluations positive rewards, material (e.g. need external urgent from 'free being that suggest 128) (1992: Inagaki and Hatano place! first the in them in engage to willingness a stimulating as well as tasks, difficult more during persistence and effort their sustain to need they confidence the with students providing by development proximal of zone the widen may self-esteem improved and beliefs self-sufficiency of Inculcation egies. strat- learning good of awareness an promoting and orientation, mastery or learning a to orientation performance a from shift a effecting for strategies all include to extended be could scaffolding of definition the lead, their ing Follow- activities. scaffolding as mistakes, make students when saving', 'face and reduction' 'stress control', 'frustration about talk (1976) a!. et Wood pedagogy. good of aspects motivational the to attending and environment learning safe emotionally and supportive a creating with — learning of sions dimen- social and affective the with concerned is teacher the Throughout, work. hands-on with associated 'noise' of level the reducing and distraction of sources eliminating complexity, linguistic reducing include scaffolding of aspects Other formance. per- student on feedback evaluative furnishes and procedures in steps critical demonstrates and models sheets'), 'think and cards cue utilizing (possibly strategies on advice and guidance provides tasks, analysing in learner the assists required, is it as information appropriate providing by memory' ternal 'ex- of kind a as functions terminology, new introduces and vocabulary key emphasizes learned, be to features important to attention directs and lights high- teacher the phase, this During shared. are remainder the while some, out carry student the and them of some out carry might teacher the chunks, manageable more into down broken been have tasks complex Once it). calls Bruner as freedom', of 'degrees the (decreasing number manageable a to task learning the in steps of number the reducing and development proximal of zone the within tasks learning locating is, that — demand cognitive of level appropriate an ensuring of matter a basically is scaffolding phase Second 97 •

enculturation as education Science

98 •

Teaching and learning science

and is the basis of self-knowledge and metacognitive awareness. Teachers themselves should be aware that providing assistance at too high a level can sometimes be counterproductive, and that assistance given without request may be perceived by some students as interference. Hand-over is complete when students no longer need teacher assistance and are capable of self-direction.

Of course, being able to carry Out a task without teacher assistance does not mean that performance is fully developed and securely acquired. First, there is a stage of conscious self-guidance, in which learners ask themselves questions: 'Where am I at?' 'What do I do next?' 'What do I need to know?' Knowing where to seek additional information, new techniques and so on is also part of learning and enculturation. Moreover, it is something that has to be fostered in students, if not directly taught to them by teachers. When this internal monitoring is no longer necessary, the student has achieved a level of performance that approaches that of the expert or connoisseur. So much has become internalized and removed from conscious control that performance is tacit and virtually automatic. There is no longer any need to think about it. While this is the desired goal of enculturation, there is an attendant danger that practice can become 'fossilized' and no longer subject to critical scrutiny, modification and development (Vygotsky 1978).

The importance of group work Basing teaching and learning on an enculturation model is one way of solving one of the major dilemmas of science education: how to provide opportunities for students to construct and reconstruct their own personal framework of understanding, while ensuring that they incorporate the particular understandings listed in the curriculum plan. However, this style of teaching is time-consuming and expensive, and if it is to function effectively,

it requires a small class size. One partial solution is to adopt group-based approaches, possibly involving peer tutoring and reciprocal teaching (Palincsar and Brown 1984).

In reciprocal teaching, the early period of teacher modelling, guidance and scaffolding gives way to a phase in which students assume the role of teacher towards other students. How often have we heard teachers say that they didn't really understand something until they began to teach it? Reciprocal teaching is based on such 'folk wisdom', and provides each student, in turn, with the opportunity to lead discussions on the meaning of text extracts, for example, using techniques of questioning, clarifying, summarizing and predicting. Advocates of such approaches report that reciprocal teaching results in better learning, improved self-esteem and enhanced metacognitive awareness (Hodson 1996). Group work not only makes more likely the expression of alternative views about phenomena and events; it also creates a forum for challenge, debate and the construction of meaning. Groups are, in themselves, learning

11. Chapter in further addressed be will it science; learning in element key a as times several noted been has Metacognition unaware. is knowledge that of originator the which of consequences and ties proper- have may and existence, independent an has created, once that, knowledge describe to (1972) Popper Karl by employed sense the in here used is 'Objective' sought. being is knowledge what recognize to failing students in result may way decontextualized abstract, an in taught was topic the when context world real a in question a Locating questions. test and examination set teachers which in context the with careful be to need the highlight also comments These

3

2

1

Notes courses. development professional in-service of provision the for and programmes education teacher pre-service for targets clear to points it And learning. and teaching of models other some than teachers science for role professional more much a of prospect the out holds that one but fications, speci- of set daunting pretty a is This society. for and individuals for raises it issues ethical and moral social, the and impact environmental and economic social, its science, of development historical the of knowledge thorough a have must they Moreover, methods. scientific and knowledge scientific both of understanding deep a have must teachers questions, critical answer and ask and students advise and criticize guide, students, for interesting and ful meaning- as well as significant scientifically are that experiences learning devise scientists, of community the of conventions and tools cultural the to students introduce to order In science. of practitioners skilled be to have also they leaders, discussion and managers organizers, facilitators, than more are teachers approach, this In science. into enculturated successfully been have themselves teachers that requires model enculturation an course, Of them. overcoming and difficulties having others see can students which in environment social secure emotionally an providing by motivation personal and self-esteem to substantially ute contrib- (c) strategies; problem-solving new and insights new of generation the stimulate (b) methods; learning poor and strategies inquiry appropriate in- misconceptions, correct and identify to students help (a) can: groups learning well, working When community. scientific the of features essential replicate can support, and guidance teacher skilful with that, communities 99 •

enculturation as education Science

•..9 Problems of assimilation and exclusion

As discussed in Chapter 7, all individuals are members of a number of social groupings, some of which are long-term associations, others of which are merely temporary. Effective participation in these social groups is, of course, dependent on possession of the appropriate cultural knowledge — that is, the shared understandings, behefs and language, codes of behaviour, values and expectations of the group. Thus, each person's profile of cultural knowledge is unique, reflecting her or his particular constellation of group memberships. For school-age students, the major groupings of the family, the peer group and the school create distinctive 'social worlds' which may or may not have common cultural knowledge. Phelan et al. (1991) suggest that points of similarity and difference between these three social worlds lead to four types of

transition into the culture of the school, a transition that is crucial to students' prospects of using the education system to further their life chances and career prospects. Their conclusions are that: • congruent worlds facilitate smooth transitions; • different worlds require transitions to be managed; • diverse worlds lead to hazardous transitions; • highly discordant worlds result in transitions being resisted or proving impossible.

In the first case, the sociocultural characteristics of the groups are not identical, but there is sufficient common ground to make transitions relatively unproblematic. In the second case, there are some differences that require

students to make adjustments and reorientations as they move between groups. 'Border crossings' (to use Henry Giroux's 1992 term) can be made, but they are not always easy and may, in Phelan et aL's (1991: 232) words, have significant 'personal and psychic costs'. In the third situation, the real or perceived differences are such that transitions require more extensive adjustment and reorientation. Successful entry into the culture of the school may even require rejection of the values and aspirations of the other two

that as such arguments despite detached, emotionally and value-free neutral, culturally as presented often is inside that social, and affective cognitive, the of fusion a is school outside learning While sake. own its for valuable being as promoted is school in that goals, achievable tangible towards directed is learning everyday While decontextualized. often is inside that contexts, tic authen- in located is school outside learning While valid. nor valued neither is world physical the about know children what that is message clear fairly The understanding. everyday and science school between wedge a driving ignored, or discredited are world real the about intuitions students' Often, matters. world real to application of capable as revealed be will all, at if later, only which knowledge, academic abstract, of mastery for demand the is education science school of culture this of aspect prominent Another exposition. teacher and activities on hands- both in focus constant a — precision for need the and Measurement • science'. of flame sacred 'the as to refer authors the which burner, Bunsen the especially — status special of Artefacts • lesson. science school secondary first very the of content sole the sometimes — vigilance constant for need the and Danger • are: themes major the which in passage de rite a as teachers by presented is science school of world the into entry (1988), al. et Delamont to According behaviour. laboratory science school of code special the create to and science school of culture the establish to seek teachers that stages early these during is It laboratory. science the of experiences first their have and school secondary to transfer they when than students for focus in sharply more never are science learning of dimensions sociocultural The

experiences science school Early them. for not is science that decide many that wonder Little hostile. and cold even sonal, imper- is climate pervading the lessons, science in especially and however, schools, many In crossings. border hazardous these managing in them assists and self-worth and belonging of sense a cultivates classroom the that crucial is it behaviour, anti-school promote even may group peer whose or success academic on value little places group family whose capital, cultural have not do who students For 1994). (May not are others while success, academic through reinforced are and school the by capital cultural as recognized are habitus some Bourdieu, to According useful. are capital cultural and beings) human as us shape that influences and experiences sociocultural the (all habitus of notions Bourdieu's that here is It up. give quickly they that such is stress emotional the try, who few those For resisted. usually is crossing border that discordant so are worlds social three the of expectations and beliefs values, the scenario, final the In apathy. and conm-iitment engagement, dis- and involvement failure, and success school between teetering cents adoles- find we that say, authors the situation, of kind this in is It worlds. 101 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

102 • Teaching and learning science

presented in Chapter 2 for a more humanized and realistic view of science. These messages are underpinned by the use of a specialized, impersonal style of communication. It is here, perhaps most of all, where it is impressed on youngsters that previous everyday experience is of little use. For the most part, this image of science is presented without explanation or justification, as self-evidently the way science is. In many school curricula there is little attempt to show the ways in which science resembles and differs from other ways of knowing, other ways of inquiring and other ways of solving problems.

Little, that is, in the way of a critical approach to learning about science. Regardless of the style of learning experience employed on any particular occasion, language plays a key role. First, enculturation into science is, in large part, a matter of acquiring familiarity with the specialized language of science and an ability to use it appropriately, in both its spoken and written forms, for a variety of purposes and in a variety of contexts. Second, teachers organize learning experiences and manage the activities of the classroom through linguistic exchanges with students. Third, teachers assist students to understand, guide and support their efforts, monitor their progress and provide feedback on their learning progress through dialogue. Thus, talk is one of the principal means by which students move from everyday commonsense understanding, and the personal language of everyday discussion in which it is usually expressed, to scientific understanding and the formal technical language in which it is expressed. And it is teacher talk, in particular, that scaffolds this transition. Teacher talk can also serve to maintain and reinforce certain myths and stereotypes and, for some students, can contribute to the problems of border crossing into the subculture of science. The power asymmetry between teacher and students is never more in

evidence than in the ways in which language is used in the classroom. Teachers can (and usually do) decide what will and will not be talked about,

who has the right to speak and for how long, what is the 'correct' way to speak and to behave while speaking and listening, and what counts as legitimate knowledge, satisfactory evidence and proper argument. By choosing the language of expression, teachers decide in favour of a particular way of thinking and, therefore, in favour of the interests and values that under-

pin it. They also decide what is an acceptable way of expressing those thoughts. Because teachers set and enforce the rules of classroom discourse, and are not required to explain or justify them to students (though some, of course, do so), there is a danger of distortion and bias. Of course, teachers are not entirely free agents; there are constraints on their freedom imposed by curriculum guidelines or directives issued by the Ministry of Education, local education authority or school board, and there are constraints imposed by the need to adopt the language of the community of scientists. Each of these influences projects a further set of explicit and implicit messages that

privilege some views, interests and values, and discount or reject others. Taken together, the rules about the conduct of lessons, the conventions concerning who can speak and what can be spoken about (including what can be challenged) and the particular form of school talk and science talk impose

orientation? sexual and class social ethnicity, gender, of regardless students, all by crossing border effective to conducive it Is • learning? good to conducive classroom science the of culture the Is • point. this at asked be should questions Two

science from Exclusion science. into entry to barrier formidable a constitute may it many for and school, primary in to used were they what from change startling a is this students, most For behaviour. of code and expectations values, language, its of establishment the to and classroom science the of culture the to sions dimen- further contribute that — on so and assessment student for basis (only) the as work written individual on emphasis constraints, time of use benches, and desks students' the and teacher's the of arrangement and size the — classrooms science of features other some describe (1991) a!. et Groisman them. for not is science that decide they wonder little is It presented. is it which in ways the in or them, to presented science the in reflected attitudes, and values aspirations, interests, experiences, their or themselves, see not do students Many voice. passive the on reliance exclusive almost an and nouns) abstract by verbs active of (replacement nominalization excessive through depersonalized is science of language The students. by doubted or challenged be to not is that ledge know- certain and established as delivered is knowledge Scientific world. the about truth the reveal painstakingly who experimenters, disinterested and ate dispassion- as portrayed are Scientists training. arduous and long a to selves them- subjected have who 'experts' to accessible only so and difficult, and complex as presented is Science practice. scientific and science of nature the about messages unappealing with daily almost presented are they science, learn to effort the make they if Even language. alien an in couched and life real from remote is that curriculum science a with presented are students disenchanted already these matters, compound To study. they how and what about self-determination and choice of measure any them denies often and unwelcome and unfamiliar is that conduct of code a them on imposes surroundings, unattractive physically in will their against them confines it time: of waste a is school that believe already They language. of forms approved the possess not do and values these share not do students Many 138) 1990: (Lemke

etc.). hierarchy, social punctuality, achievement, rationalism, orderliness, control, (emotional culture middle-class North-European of values the to committed speakers, dialect standard English-speakers, native class, upper-middle and middle- black, than rather white female, than rather male science: talk to way 'appropriate' the define who those like be to tend science in succeed who those that surprising not is It education. science to access gaining from prevented are children many that formidable so be can that restrictions and conventions of set a 103 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

104 • Teaching and learning science

Some would argue that it is precisely because school science excludes most everyday knowledge, practical skills and commonsense understandings that it remains, for many children, peripheral to their needs and interests and irrelevant to the way they see their lives. It is important to recognize, however, that the decontextualizing of knowledge may have a more detrimental impact on working-class children than on those from middle-class homes (Domingos 1989). It should also be remembered that media images can play a significant role in determining students' enthusiasm (or lack of it) for science and science education. hi Western society, television, newspapers, comics and movies provide fragments of knowledge (some valid, some fanciful, some entirely fictional) and, perhaps more importantly, convey attitudinal and emotional messages about science and technology — about use of animals, hazards to human health, environmental degradation, for example. Science is presented by the media in ways that are strikingly different from school science's impersonal and orderly presentation of abstract notions. Furthermore, it isn't just science' in the sense of everyday conceptual understanding (what we might call 'commonsense science') that the media promote, it is science' in the sense of an everyday image of what science is, what scientists do and how science impacts, for good and bad, on

people and on the environment. The media also play a part in building students' perceptions of who has a place in science. When members of a particular group don't see themselves included in media representations of science and science education, they are dissuaded from seeking admission. To say that science is widely perceived as masculine is, perhaps, no longer considered controversial.

There are at least four distinct senses in which it can be argued that science is masculine. The most obvious is in terms of numbers — who studies science at school, who teaches it, who is recognized as a scientist. Secondly, there is the packaging of science, the way it is presented, the examples and applications that are stressed. Thirdly, there are the classroom behaviours and interactions whereby elements of masculinity and femininity developed in out-of-school contexts are transformed in such a way as to establish science as a male preserve. And finally there is the suggestion that the type of thinking commonly labelled scientific embodies an intrinsically masculine world view. (Kelly 1987: 66)

Arguments parallel to those used to criticize science and science education for their androcentrism have been used to criticize them for Eurocentrism and classism. In other words, the culture of science and the culture of science education are incompatible with the knowledge, values, aspirations and experiences of many children from ethnic minority cultures and from low SES communities (Hodson 1993a, 1998; Stanley and Brickhouse 1994). Costa (1995) has utilized Phelan et al's (1991) work to describe the ways in which different students effect (or not) the transition into the culture of school science. She describes the various patterns in the relationships between

family climate, school or classroom in changes by affected profoundly be may and time, over stable necessarily not are patterns individual, one any for Moreover, transition. effecting for strategies different adopt may fore, there- and, them perceive boys way the from differently boundaries perceive may girls Similarly, 1997). 1996, (Aikenhead settings social between move to attempt or move they as strategies adaptation different use and differently boundaries perceive will groups ethnic different of students that likely is It them. by impeded are others while successfully boundaries negotiate students some how know to important is it population, school diverse creasingly in- an for suitable curriculum science a provide to struggle teachers As

•

prominent a has science which in plans career and aspirations cational edu- have students These unproblematic. and smooth is science school of culture the into transition the and science, and school of worlds the with congruent are friends and family of worlds the where — scientists Potential

•

teachers. and schools of distrust their by and school, outside and inside both support of lack through prevented is science school of culture the into transition science, with cope to ability intellectual the and world, physical the in interest natural a have students these Although science. of world the with compatible potentially but school of world the with irreconcilable are friends and family of worlds the where — outsiders Inside science. about care nor about know neither They impossible. virtually is science school of culture the into transition that so general, in school, from alienated or with disillusioned be to tend students These science. and school both with discordant are friends and family of worlds the where — Outsiders material.' the understanding really ever without grades reasonable obtaining and system the of demands the meeting of way a find students these Often, cost. personal some at possible though hazardous, is science school of culture the into Transition science. and school both with sistent incon- are friends and family of worlds the where — students know' don't 'I purposes. educational of pursuit in it of use instrumental make can they them, to interesting personally not is science While difficulty. much too without science school of culture the into ition trans- the manage can students These science. with not but school, with congruent are friends and family of worlds the where — kids smart Other

•

•

•

role.

are: types student Costa's impossible. not if difficult, become crossings border behaviours, and values language, methods, theories, cepts, con- of terms in communities between discrepancies major are there When

classroom. science the of those with consistent are groups peer and family their of expectations and beliefs values, the that extent the to negative or positive are experiences Their ways. different very in curriculum science same the experience student five These student. of categories broad five of terms in science school in success their and worlds social students' 105 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

106 • Teaching and learning science circumstances and peer group friendships. In Costa's California-based study, all students in the 'inside outsider' category were African-Americans. Just as significant is the observation that most of those for whom transition into the world of school science is smooth and unproblematic were from white middle-class family groups. It is also the case that transitions were generally smoother for boys than for girls.

The dangers of assimilation The apprenticeship model of teaching and learning, intended to overcome the relativist charges against constructivist pedagogy and provide a more personalized form of enculturation into science, can sometimes increase resistance to science in the ways just described. Paradoxically, it can also become a stultifying assimilation. Because they are advocates for the established scientific view and for the scientific way of building knowledge, teachers

seek to create an environment in which this knowledge is presented as reasonable, useful and worthy of incorporation into a personal framework of understanding. This entails helping students to go beyond the evidence normally available to them through the provision of contrived experiences that (a) contradict or weaken an everyday view, or (b) support the scientific view. Teachers also construct 'a good case' for the scientific way of building theory through experiment, correlational studies, literature -based research and theoretical argument, and may even model what counts as a good explanation or good inquiry in science. The danger inherent in this approach is that, because of the asymmetry of the teacher—student relationship, students will come to accept science as a superior way of knowing simply on the authority of the teacher or the textbook. The relationship between teachers and students is asymmetric in the sense that teachers urge students to include scientific views in their personal frameworks of understanding, sometimes even urging them to accept such views as true accounts of the world (Nadeau and Desautels 1984). It is asymmetric in the sense that teachers know more than students and have more experience of science, so that they are seen by students as a source of authoritative, reliable and valid knowledge. It is asymmetric in terms of feelings, in that teachers are usually confident in their knowledge (of science), while students may be anxious and may be experiencing shock' as they begin to recognize the inadequacies of their everyday knowledge for coping with the tasks that the teacher sets them. Above all, it is asymmetric in terms of power and control. Invariably, it is the teacher who sets the agenda and establishes the nature of the discourse. The asymmetry of teacher and learner is, of course, essential to learning within the zone of proximal development. So, too, is retention of control by the more expert of the nature of the activities, at least in the early stages. However, in many school learning situations, this asymmetry can be such that it interferes with, and even inhibits, good learning.

understanding. of lack or incomprehension indicate always don't silences However, answer. the supply or question alternative an ask student, ferent dif- a ask they before response a formulate to students for time insufficient leave often teachers occur, might interaction student—teacher significant that way a such in phrased is question the when Even discussion. useful for basis the form to demand cognitive of level a low too at pitched are questions most that case the also is It answers. right possible of range narrow very a or answer right single a have they that sense the in 'closed' — questions closed of use excessive an by reinforced is This them. find to simply task students' the is it and answers the all know teachers that is message implicit The ence. evid- of appraisal rational a in engage to or speculate to invitation an than knowledge their of test a more are interactions question—answer that feel students result, a As ask. they questions the to answers the know teachers that careers, school their in early very students, most to clear becomes It

strategies questioning Questioning solution. successful a achieving of confidence real any with problems novel tackle to or principles basic from work to unable are but do, and say to what know they learning': 'ritualized call (1987) Mercer and Edwards what on and algorithms on dependent are they where level a at remain dents stu- many consequence, a As incomplete. often is learner to teacher from learning of control of hand-over The orientation'. answer 'right a into ized social- are students which through role directive highly a adopt teachers many ideal, than less are that facilities and resources curriculum and high too are that sizes class curriculum, overloaded an through get to need ever-present the and pressure time of Because syllabus'. the on 'it's or book' the in 'it's because than reason better no for view particular a accept to required are they and so', 'says teacher the because than seemingly, reason, better no for things do to asked frequently are they that is students for 'mystery' The form. approved an in them express to how also but setting, social new this in question a to answer an as or problem a as counts what only not relearn to have Students way. formal and abstract highly a in ideas and problems present to tendency its and reality everyday from ing learn- school of much of remoteness distinctive the with terms to come to is school in students facing tasks the of One communication. and pretation inter- conduct, of rules different in embedded are they because differently very approached practice, in are, tasks learning similar be to surface the on seem may What involved. parties all on demands different create which rules', 'ground different significantly are There work. and community home, of settings natural the in learning from different is school of settings trived con- the in Learning mystery. a children, many for remains, and unstated often is enterprise learning the of purpose the hand, other the on and, our behavi- of code a rigid too and rules many too by surrounded is life school hand, one the on that, is problem the of part major a Paradoxically, 107 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

108 • Teaching and learning science

They may be times' that students need in order to assemble a satisfactory answer. Therefore, impatient teachers, keen to move the lesson along

at a brisk pace, may be denying students sufficient opportunity to think. When teachers extend this await time' (say from one to three seconds), the frequency and quality of student responses usually increase (Rowe 1974; Swift and Gooding 1983). Moreover, there is much greater elaboration of answers, increased frequency of student-initiated questions and comments and more critical responses to the utterances of other students. Wood (1991) states that the more questions teachers ask, the less children will say. Conversely, the less frequent the questions, the more likely it is that students will provide an elaborated response. Moreover, the less frequently teachers interrogate children, the more likely those children are to listen, make unsolicited contributions and ask questions of their own — both of the teacher and of other students. He concludes that it is more productive for teachers to talk about their own views and ideas (and, presumably, why they hold them) than constantly to ask questions. When teachers speculate, express opinions and make clear their reasoning processes, he says, students are likely to respond similarly. Where teachers, in one sense, answer their own putative questions to provide possible answers, opinions and so on, children as young as four years of age reciprocate by adopting a similar cognitive-linguistic stance and remain relatively active and forthcoming at the same time. (Wood 1991: 116)

Just as teacher questions are often badly deployed, and so contribute to a fright answer orientation', so teacher talk is often poorly utilized. Quite properly, teacher talk is used to hold and direct students' attention, highlight significant points, provide a common vocabulary, give insight into procedures, establish the context of meaning and so on. It is also improperly and, perhaps, unconsciously used to privilege particular views, interests and values and to

marginalize others, and to include some students and exclude others.

Language issues Bakhtin (1981, 1986) points out that not only do we have a national language (in this case, English), but we also communicate regularly in a range of social languages and employ a variety of speech genres that are the characteristic modes of expression of particular sub-groups in society. Speech genres

include everyday greetings, dinner table conversations, verbal exchanges concerned with buying and selling goods and services, cross-examination of witnesses by courtroom lawyers, intimate talk between close friends or lovers,

military commands, urgent communications between colleagues engaged in a specialized task, mother—infant talk and so on. They are not formalized languages, but they are distinctive and have clear purposes and socially agreed meanings. Each of us uses speech embedded in these social languages

marginalize and views certain privilege they Often, arise. can difficulties that here is It ignored. or discouraged disapproved, be to seen are others while utilized, and validated introduced, are views particular that ensuring thereby contributions, student of appropriateness and relevance of criteria the establish also they discussion, for topic the define and agenda the set only not teachers means, these By on. so and views acceptable and solutions preferred at arriving of ways easy introduce c, and b a, to than rather z and y x, to attention direct questions, specific ask they it: achieve to order in discourse classroom control and define teachers Consequently, science. into enculturation constitutes that understanding this is It plan. curriculum the in specified that — understanding particular at arrive will students that mind in it have teachers course, Of content. curriculum and management classroom both of terms in curriculum, the control to right his or her and teacher the of authority the signal to used also is language But students. science school of community the case this in community, the of membership signals adoption its solidarity; and identification of means a as serves Language 815) 1992: (O'Loughlin voice. student's the of expense the at privileged is voice ative authorit- teacher's the because dialogue, true not is it occur, exchanges teachers middle-class of genre speech usual conversational although the is that discourse technical-rational decontextualized, abstract, the in events and issues about thinking toward reference of frames ential experi- own their from away students shift to as so dialogue the ture struc- constantly (teachers) conversation, in students engage they When .

.

.

discourse. of mode preferred their into students shift teachers unconsciously, Perhaps reference. of frame and language teacher's the of status superior the firm con- students directive, unstated) (often this to responding By way). 'right' (the way particular a in presented be to answers expect and way particular a in so do they example, for questions, ask teachers When controlling. and ive assert- rigid, too frequently is influence this that however, seems, It values. underlying their and views students' over influence considerable exercise to thereafter, teachers, enables language through solidarity Building on. so and inquiry; scientific of disinterestedness the observation; of priority the sion; preci- and accuracy for need the danger; ever-present and apparatus ized special- with place', 'special a as laboratory the science: school of culture the maintain and establish to and cooperation and participation student foster to etc.) .' that. believe 'We scientist', a are ('You belonging of language a utilize teachers some how shows (1995) Moje students. on imposed or by acquired systematically and teachers by used selectively is language which in communities speech distinctive as regarded be can classrooms School is. it language social or genre whose group the of values and interpretations assumptions, common the it with carries genre each constituted, socioculturally is speech because Moreover, reliably. and quickly meaning convey to genres speech and .

109 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

110 • Teaching and learning science

others, claiming that to do otherwise would take too long and be too uncertain. As Edwards and Mercer (1987) say, the supposed freedom of students in contemporary classrooms to express their own views is largely illusory. In many cases, teachers retain too strict a control over what is said and done, and over the conclusions and interpretations arrived at, though they may sometimes do so unconsciously.

Reinforcing the culture of certainty and compliance One of the most powerful ways of imposing meaning is by presumption and presupposition, simply assuming a particular interpretation. Many aspects of learning science and learning about science are simply taken for granted; they are rarely, if ever, questioned by teachers or students. This is part of the of certainty' (Bencze and Hodson 1998) that permeates the culture of school science and serves to silence some students and foster a rigid conformity in others. It is this climate of authority and conformity that inclines students towards a fright answer orientation' rather than an explanationsoriented approach rooted in an understanding of fundamental principles. In

the language of Chapter 6, it promotes a performance orientation rather than a mastery or learning orientation. In simple terms, when students perceive that the social climate of the classroom is such that the teacher's knowledge and style of discourse is highly valued and their own is not, they become reluctant to proffer alternative views, however sensible they may be, and are content with repeating verbatim what the teacher says. Some students come to see their task as memorizing a series of definitions and reproducing them on demand, mastering a set of algorithms for solving standard problems and carrying out the teacher's instructions for (pseudo) experimental inquiries in order to obtain a predetermined set of results.

They do not see their role as being to think or to question the source, relevance, validity and reliability of what they are given; nor to design, conduct and interpret scientific inquiries for themselves and by themselves. These students succeed in the sense of being able to say and do the fright things', and to gain the marks that are made available for such conformity, but they fail in the sense of gaining a robust and usable set of meanings to incorporate into a personal framework of understanding. What they learn is how to do classroom tasks, how to be neat, how to finish on time, how to look busy and to fill up the available time, how to avoid attracting the teacher's attention and, if it is practical work, how to tidy away and write things up in the approved form. They may also develop passive-resistance techniques, such as accommodation, ingratiation, evasiveness, and manipulation' (Atwater 1996: 823). What they do not learn is how to employ their knowledge in novel situations and how to use it to develop a deeper and richer understanding. Such students have not been enculturated into science; rather, they have been acculturated and assimilated into school. They have learned their own version of Fatima's rules!

goals. other of pursuit in education science of use instrumental make can and grades acceptable achieve Fatima like students tests, in reproduce they material the understand not may they Although phrases'). and words bold-faced the memorize just textbook, the read 'Don't (e.g. conventions and rules invented of set a to according school' of game the 'plays successfully and consistently who (Fatima) student a describes (1995) Larson study, insightful particularly a In

1

Note 111 •

exclusion and assimilation of Problems

Authenticity in science and learning

The case built over the course of the preceding chapters is that science education should be seen as a matter of enculturation into the knowledge, practices, language and values of the community of scientists, a process that necessitates close contact with a more knowledgeable member of that community, who acts as guide, mentor and support. It has also been argued that each student possesses a unique personal framework of understanding, in which experience, emotions, values, sense of self and social identity play a crucial mediating role, determining what is regarded as significant and when! how it is utilized. These frameworks of meaning are, of course, in constant flux, development and interaction. Moreover, as circumstances change, especially social circumstances, different elements of understanding are accessed. Of course, teachers have a personal framework of understanding too, and it

is important for them to be mindful not to operate all the time within the aspects' of it, especially if these are not fully shared with and understood by the students. Teachers' use of aspects of their personal framework of understanding that are radically different from those of the students can be responsible for learning difficulties and, at the more extreme level, for impeding students in crossing the border into the subculture of science. Eventually, as an individual's framework of personal understanding develops, areas of coherence emerge and, as they grow, relationships are established among them. Points of mismatch and conflict may be recognized, and either resolved or tolerated. It is also likely that many remain undetected and unrecognized. At the same time, elements that constitute one's sense of personal identity — values, commitments, social aspirations, elements relating to gender, ethnicity, social class, sexual orientation and peer group membership, for example — exert an increasing influence on what is attended to and what further understanding is incorporated. In Aikenhead's (1996: 14) words,

science is influenced as much by diverse subcultures within a student's life-world as it is by a student's prior knowledge and the "taught" curriculum.' Who we are, or who we believe ourselves to be or aspire to be,

change. may usefulness and significance relative their unfolds, history personal individual's the as time, Over contexts. different in used and accessed be to understanding, of framework personal individual's the within remain can ideas conflicting Even 'chunks'. context-related into fragmented essentially remains individuals most of understanding of framework personal the that seems it consistency, and coherence of areas Despite chapter. this in further explored is that adults), among presumably, (and, students older among mon com- equally is but children, young to restricted not is characteristic this that finding the and constructions), (dual typology the in category fourth the is It framework).' interpretive the of development and extension (the tuning and interpreted) successfully be can that data factual of accumulation gradual (the accretion as (1981) Norman and Rumelhart by described are changes These science. normal Kuhnian resemble that understanding sonal per- to modifications and changes of kind the for reserved best is changes' 'incremental of category The revolution. scientific Kuhnian a resemble that understanding personal in changes those is, that — typology their in categories two first the explaining to confined be should conditions, essential its with change, conceptual of view (1982) al.'s et Posner that suggest (1996) al. et Demastes Indeed, believe. us have would literature change conceptual the of much than predictable, and rational less far and idiosyncratic, and plex com- more far is science learning that point overarching the than important less is characterization fourfold their in correct are authors the Whether frameworks. conceptual incompatible logically of utffization — constructions Dual • use. extensive more and appropriate to shift gradual a by followed framework, changed un- otherwise an within fashion) recall rote in (possibly term new a of use early by characterized change, piecemeal gradual, — changes Incremental • argument. and evidence of appraisal rational the of consequence a as idea new a by replaced completely is conception existing an — changes Wholesale • timescale. short relatively a over changes related of sequence a precipitates conception key one of change a — changes of Cascade •

histories. learning such to contribute might that change conceptual of patterns distinctive four describe (1996) al. et Demastes topics. different on histories learning different qualitatively be will there student, particular a for and, class the within evident be will histories' 'learning different topic, particular a of teaching the During experiences. learning of set particular a to ways of variety a in respond will students of class a that expected be to is it standing, under- of framework personal individual's each of uniqueness the Given on. so and directions; particular in learning orients it possible; knowledge further of acquisition makes it commitments; and beliefs underlying reinforce or modify change, to acts it 'tool': a as used is understanding of framework personal dent's stu- a into incorporated successfully is knowledge Whatever experienced. have and know already we what by determined is are we who that case the also is It learn. to seek we what and to attention pay we what determines 113 •

learning and sdence in Authenticity

114 • Teaching and learning science The case I intend to argue is that this should not be regarded as problematic, provided that students recognize that this is the case, gain some good under-

standing of their own knowledge and how it is organized, learn how to recognize the circumstances in which different chunks are appropriate and can use them properly and access them quickly and reliably as the need arises.

Context-dependent learning Scribner (1984) has shown both the situation-specificity of complex problemsolving algorithms used by a range of blue-collar workers and the separate-

ness of these strategies from mathematical knowledge taught in school. Many similar findings (Lave 1988; Schliemann and Carraher 1992) point to the highly specific task-related nature of much everyday knowledge. Indeed, Lave (1988) argues that cognition and learning should be regarded as 'practices' — activities inherently part of routine, everyday experience — rather than activities occurring solely in an individual's mind. In other words, thinking, knowing and learning are encounters between 'cognitive agents' and specific situations, and are best studied in their embedded, routinized, everyday context. Consequently, highly personal methods of solving problems are often developed and used successfully in practical situations by those who seem unable to solve logically similar problems in a formal mathematics test. In Scribner's (1984: 39) words, 'skilled practical thinking is goal-directed and varies adaptively with changing properties of problems and the changing conditions in the task environment.' It has little to do with the kinds of knowledge and skills generally taught in school. Indeed, research by Carraher eta!. (1985, 1987) and Saxe (1991) in a wide variety of work and domestic situations shows that two distinct systems of arithmetic procedures and practices (one symbol/rule-based, the other meaning-based) function largely independently of each other. George (1995) has identified similar differences between the universalistic meanings and formal reasoning of school science and the particularistic meanings and goal-oriented reasoning of what she calls the 'street science' of everyday life, and Layton etal. (1993) have shown that the kind of scientific knowledge and the kind of reasoning used in real world situations, even by those educated in science, are very different from what is taught in school science. Even within school, styles of reasoning and the kinds of explanations proffered by students may vary with context. In addressing topics in an STS-oriented programme, for example, students tend to use either a scientific mode of reasoning or a social and moral-ethical one, depending on how they perceive the question (Fleming 1986). In chemistry, many students seem unable to transfer understanding and problem-solving skills between the atomic/molecular level of theoretical understanding and the macroscopic level of real materials (Stayer and Lumpe 1995).

The notion that coherence and consistency among ideas is related to particular contexts, rather than extending across the whole of personal knowledge, can, to an extent, be used to describe science itself. There are some

context-specific of series a of mastery successive the as seen be therefore, should, development Cognitive use. or acquisition its can Nor individuals. over or contexts over either generalizable as considered be cannot ledge know- that follows It discourse. of style community-approved particular a through expressed and co-constructed is informs, it practices the and ledge, know- communities, these Within it. used and maintained validated, ated, gener- have that communities and interactions situations, social specific the to related intimately is knowledge Thus, setting. social specific a in also but problem-context specific a in only not embedded are tasks that in practices', 'social also are practices professional and practices everyday course, Of restricted. and modest more somewhat usually are cians techni- and scientists most of expertise of scope the and concerns occupying pre- the that state to is it Rather, example. for revolutions, Einsteinian and Newtonian the — them produce time to time from and theories, unifying for search the to committed are scientists some that deny to attempt an it is Nor well. going not are things when disbelief' their 'suspend to scientists enables and imagination of leaps inventive and bold permits research, guides that — change) catastrophic versus evolution versus constancy analysis; versus (synthesis choices triadic or diadic as occur which of many — themata calls he what to commitment scientists' is it example, for (1986), Holton to According fields. disparate seemingly in scientists of work the unify to periodically, serve, and boundaries subject transcend that on) so and time of nature the with concern reductionism/holism, randomness, as (such themes disciplinary inter- certain of existence the deny to attempt an as interpreted be not should This elements. incompatible mutually seemingly and isolated still are there which within but established, are relationships important many which

within understanding, of framework unique a constitute fragments these time, Over 1977). (Kuhn context particular a in useful is which of each on), so and techniques instrumental procedures, experimental theory, of ments (frag- problem-solutions concrete separate largely with familiar becoming by piecemeal, expertise their up build they rather, methods; all-powerful and theories all-embracing complete acquire not do scientists practice, In concern. a usually not is levels general more at consistency and Coherence contexts. those to, distinctive and for, tailor-made is that knowledge procedural and conceptual develop scientists contexts, circumscribed relatively in working By it. investigate to how and science of aspect restricted very a of ledge know- personal detailed having means commonly science in expertise that so problems, defined narrowly fairly on focus scientists practising Most inquiry. particular the of circumstances unique the on depends appropriate is What investigations. particular of context the within only meaning precise has really method scientific earlier, discussed As 1988). (Mayer causation' 'ultimate for concern its with biology, evolutionary and causation', 'proximate for cern con- its with biology, functional between differences major are there logy, bio- within Even investigations. conduct and conceptualize physicists and biologists which in ways the example, for between, differences striking very 115 •

learning and science in Authenticity

116 • Teaching and learning science

knowledges and modes of discourse, where 'context' is writ both large and small — large in the sense that it means a community context, small in the sense that it means a particular problem situation.2 Students build up a repertoire of context-specific knowledges through social interaction, negotiation and co-construction of meaning, with different social contexts providing

different inputs into the individual's construction of a personal framework of understanding. Within this model of learning, the kinds of age-related universals considered by Piaget are less important than the context-specific contributions of different social groups. Learning is regarded as an active, continuous and changing series of negotiations between the individual and the social environments in which she or he moves. In addition, because of the interactive nature of social encounters, the social context is both the product of interaction and the impetus and guide for development. The social context not only facilitates and structures learning and the development of understanding, it also motivates the learner because it provides the authentic contexts within which apprentices gain a sense of self, feelings of increasing competence and recognition and a sense of ownership. In a sense, these are the sociocultural equivalents of the fruitfulness cited by Posner et al. (1982) as the key to cognitive restructuring. However, while it is the contextualized nature of learning that leads to a sense of ownership, it may be recognition of more universalistic and generalized meanings that effects the transition from novice to expert status, and eventually to scientific connoisseurship. Recognition of the highly context-specific nature of much of everyday knowledge and practice does not entail the view that cognitive activities are absolutely specific to the context in which they were originally learned. To function satisfactorily in a complex world, we must be able to generalize some aspects of knowledge and skills to new situations. The interesting questions centre on what is generalizable and transferable. Perkins and Salomon (1989) argue that there are general cognitive skills, but they function in contextualized ways. When experts are faced with atypical problems that don't yield to straightforward approaches, they apply general strategies — such as reason-

ing by analogy with systems they understand better, searching for counter examples and misanalogies, exploring 'extreme case' scenarios, employing visualization techniques and thought experiments and solving simpler parallel problems — all of which function in a contextualized way to access and deploy a rich database of conceptual and experiential knowledge.3 Another effective approach is to use a generalized level of control or problem management rooted in metacognitive awareness, asking such questions as 'What am I doing now?', 'Is it getting me anywhere?', 'What else might I try?' In general terms, it seems that experts not only know more than novices, but have more accessible and usable knowledge because it is differently (better) organized. While novice problem-solvers access concepts, procedures and equations one by one, experts access related clusters of relevant knowledge, and while novices tend to address superficial features of a problem, experts are able to use more powerful overarching principles (Larkin 1983).

based approaches of advocates contrast, By understanding. and insights new generate to use or situations novel in deploy cannot but acquired, were they which in context precise the in successfully apply can they which algorithms, and routines definitions, some know students which in state a is It ledge. know- ritualized as describe (1987) Mercer and Edwards that learning of kind the produce to inert, or 'empty' concepts render to is outcome The 32). 1989: al. et (Brown used' and learned is it which in situations the of pendent inde- theoretically substance, self-sufficient integral, 'an as knowledge ing treat- doing, from knowing separate to seeks It context-transcendence. their emphasize to attempt an in possibly concepts, scientific of teaching the tualize decontex- to attempts often science school previously, times several stated as Sadly, design. curriculum in issue major a be should that whether and use of context of issue the raises argument of line This understand. to come we as (properly) use we and use, we as understand we use, then and understand not do we words, other In ourselves. than expert more others by supported and monitored are correctly it use to attempts our as or appropriately, it use we as it understand to come we that and designed, was it which for purpose the for appropriately it use we that extent the to something understand we that argument the is learning of model enculturation the to Fundamental

science doing science, about learning science, Learning together. develop knowledge procedural and conceptual which in ways the exploring means also this education, science of case the In interact. knowledge localized and strategies generalized how recognize to and knowledge contextual apply to how and invoke to when nize recog- to but it, without problems solve to attempt to or knowledge, based context- disregard to not is competence academic developing to key The inquiry. of method or ledge know- of body a just as than rather procedures, and rules complex with practice, community a as considered be should and 'context' a is Science learning. of kind other any as features) sociocultural distinctive its with school, in situated case, this (in situated much as is school in ing learn- Thus, illustrates. discussion earlier as use, language and behaviour of codes special requiring and demands special making context, specialized particular a is science school it, within and, 'context' a is itself School

•

•

response. in made be should points Two thinking. everyday from 'distanced' are students which by process the contexts, situational from disembedded increasingly becomes thought which by process the is development assisted educationally that argued have some Indeed, novices. than level general more a at function experts words, other In 1986). (Carey exemplars for knowledge experiential of stock their on drawing principles, first from work to attempt and holistic more are experts algorithms, and formulae learned previously employ to attempt and analysis means—end use novices While 117 •

learning and science in Authenticity

118 • Teaching and learning science on theories of situated cognition claim that understanding is developed (only) through continued, situated use. In other words, learning is successful when embedded in authentic and meaningful activity. Authentic activities are the ordinary day-to-day actions of the community of practitioners. Thus, to learn science is to engage in the activities of the community of science, alongside a skilled practitioner who acts as guide, mentor and support (the notion of apprenticeship discussed previously). Two questions should be asked at this point.

• What is it that scientists do? • Can all that students need to learn in school science courses be learnt by doing science?

Providing an answer to the first question involves detailed considerations in the history, philosophy and sociology of science that are outside the scope of this book, although some of the relevant issues were raised, very briefly, in Chapter 2. Providing an answer to the second question involves a critical inquiry into the distinctions and relationships among learning science, learning about science and doing science. While they are in some senses separate, and can best be achieved by different teaching and learning strategies, they are also closely related. While there is a strong case for regarding as nonsense the notion that the processes and methods of science are knowledge-free and that scientific processes can be taught independently of content (Hodson 1992), it would

be equally absurd to regard scientific knowledge as independent of the methods that generated and validated it. Scientific knowledge and scientific method develop together, with theory building and experimentation proceeding hand-in-hand (Hodson 1988). Authentic problems involve scientists using and developing their procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding as problems are tackled — though, of course, they also learn in other ways. So it is with learning science in school: content knowledge and process knowledge are utilized together and develop together. Concepts and theories can be regarded as tools, to be used for the purposes for which they were designed, and able to be explored and developed by attempting to widen and extend their use. Those purposes include, for example, description, explanation, prediction and control. They are also

employed in designing, interpreting and communicating the findings of scientific inquiries, for which scientists also need procedural knowledge — knowledge of the methods and techniques of scientific inquiry. By engaging in these activities, scientists intend to extend, develop and change both their conceptual and procedural knowledge. If learning experiences in school are to be authentic, they should be designed to provide opportunities for students to test the robustness of their conceptual understanding in these contexts of use and to engage in activities focusing on describing, explaining, predicting, inquiring and controlling as a way of developing that understanding. Because processes and concepts are interdependent, it is reasonable to suppose that engaging in the processes of science changes one's conceptual

school in experiences science Making uncertain. and fragile too or complex too are they because inquiry experimental for unsuitable simply are settings field many that case the is It laboratory. the of situation contrived the than rather settings natural in events and phenomena study to opportunities provide also They interactions. the of nature the about assumptions fewer make they because science, of open-mindedness supposed the to inquiry experimental than faithful more are variables among correlations seeking studies sense, a In role. crucial a play studies correlational that here is It expensive. or dangerous difficult, too is or reasons, ethical for inadmissible ruled is but principle in possible be may experimentation fields, some In experiments. of use no or little make so and space, and time in inaccessible and remote are that events with deal endeavour scientific of fields Many idiosyncratic. is inquiry scientific (b) and experimental, is inquiry scientific all not (a) made: be should points Two data. multivariate and patterns types, graph tables, include handling data with associated those accuracy; and repeatability instrument, of choice interval, and range scale, relative include measurement with associated those types; variable and sample test, fair identification, variable include design perimental exwith associated Those data. gathered experimentally of validity and ity reliabil- the of appraisal an to essential evidence' of the term they what identifying taught, systematically be can that inquiry experimental of features the of some on focus 1996) (1995, Duggan and Gott taught. be to have things These organized. is science in knowledge conceptual which in ways the discover will they than themselves for inquiry scientific of methods the discover more no will students However, inquiries. scientific conducting by inquiry scientific of nature overall the of understanding deeper a acquire will they that follows it And others. by skilfully and appropriately used been has it whether evaluate and themselves it use can they that extent the to knowledge procedural understand will students that follows also It themselves. in goals or ends as not science, about learning and science learning of goals the to means pedagogic the as regarded are science of sub-processes various the here that is approach process the and suggestion this between different crucially is What understanding. conceptual their developing of way a is problems) solving and investigations conducting (in science of processes the deploy to students encouraging Therefore, hand-in-hand. develop they hand, hand-in- proceed they knowledge: procedural and knowledge conceptual between relationship synergic a is There activity. scientific by assisted and stimulated is individuals in development conceptual way, another Put fied. modi- thereby, and, evaluated tested, manipulated, is knowledge conceptual on), so and classifications scientific observations, scientific (making activity scientific in engagement Through knowledge. conceptual their of opment devel- the influence profoundly will in engage students processes the so science, of processes various the use students which in ways the determines knowledge conceptual of possession the as Just understanding. of opment devel- the in role crucial a play skills process words, other In understanding. 119 •

learning and science in Authenticity

120 • Teaching and learning science

more authentic necessitates a shift away from the current preoccupation with experimentation and the 'illusion of certainty' that accompanies it. Bencze (1996) provides a detailed argument for the adoption of correlational studies

in science education and a critical discussion of their distinctive features, including systematic inquiry via statistical control. Authenticity also involves recognizing that, in the real world of scientific practice, success in the creative enterprise of doing science comes to those who can choose a course of action that is well suited to the situation. There are no rules for making these kinds of choices; there is no algorithm that can be applied. All decisions are local — determined by the particular circumstances of individual investigations — and, therefore, idiosyncratic. As in games

playing, success comes to those who can improvise and exploit opportunities, rather than to those who slavishly seek to follow strict guidelines. As Albert Einstein is reputed to have said, to be a successful scientist it is necessary to be an unscrupulous opportunist! Pedagogical issues related to learning about the scope of scientific investiga-

tion and acquiring (some of) the tacit knowledge necessary for successful inquiry are addressed in Chapter 12. So, too, is the second question posed above: 'Can all that students need to learn in school science courses be learnt by doing science?'

In search of a pedagogy What guidance can be drawn from this and earlier chapters to assist the design of effective teaching and learning activities? First, they should be of interest and significance to the learner: prioritizing the affective was quite deliberately chosen as the title for Chapter 6 to indicate the necessity for engaging students in activities they perceive as meaningful and important.

Without a sense of ownership and commitment there is unlikely to be significant learning. Bettencourt (1992: 83, my italics) makes the point that 'understanding starts with a question, not any question but a real question. A question that because it is real does not remain detached from us . . Said in another way a real question expresses a desire to know. This desire is what moves the questioner to pursue the question until an adequate answer has been found.' Real questions may be raised or generated by students or teachers; they may arise directly from lesson activities or be prompted by concerns in the wider community. This latter point speaks directly to the matter of politicization and the design of science curricula around matters of social, economic and environmental significance. It should also be noted that part of enculturation is learning, with appropriate teacher guidance and support, how to put questions in a form that is susceptible to rigorous and critical inquiry. Previous chapters have emphasized the need to acknowledge and build on the knowledge and experiences that students already possess, but also to test and challenge existing understanding in a careful and sensitive way that .

that phase performance a into lead will teacher, the with negotiation in made decisions, These on. so and conducted be to experiments of kinds the sulted, con- be to information of sources the studied, be to events and phenomena objects, the about made be to have decisions so experience/laboratory-based, field or literature/media-based either as regarded be can inquiries terms, broad In phase. initiation the in raised questions and issues the address will that information gather to teacher, the alongside and groups, in or vidually indi- work students self-explanatory: perhaps, are, phases remaining The task. discussion or writing reading, a in them engaging or out carry to work investigative exploratory some them giving trip, field a on students taking labelling, product or advertising of examples some at looking bulletin, news a from item or cutting newspaper a on attention focusing story, or poem a reading movie, or video a showing demonstrations, conducting tographs, pho- or objects displaying by questioning and curiosity interest, stimulate to teachers for necessary be may it cases, many In school. outside concerns by triggered be or lessons of course the in naturally arise may they teachers; or students by asked be may questions Interesting inquiry. the for focus a finding and commitment, and interest generating of matter a is Initiation communicating. and reporting interpretation; performance; planning; and design initiation;

• • • • •

phases: five comprising as it regard to purposes present for useful is it idiosyncratic, and fluid both is inquiry that argued been previously has it Although port. sup- and guidance teacher of amounts varying with student-led, or students and teacher between shared and negotiated modelled), (and teacher-led be to activities classroom for allows inquiry by Learning practitioner. skilled a of guidance the under scientists, of community the of values and norms the with accordance in conducted and collaborative, and personalized oriented, inquiry- be to likely is learning of form effective most the view, my In diversity. sodal and cultural enormous encompass may that classroom a within this all achieve to moreover, and, plan; curriculum the by designated understanding particular the at arrive students that ensuring while activity, scientific authentic of characteristics the has also that ing learn- active self-directed, for opportunities provide to how teacher: science the for dilenunas major the of one lies Herein science. authentic constitute that acting and thinking of ways the to closer scientists of community the of members novice leads that scaffolding appropriate and designed well by supported be must development proximal of zone the within understanding further construct to attempts students' that argued been has it addition, In uses. other have may that meanings commonsense discard to them require necessarily not does but understanding, of frameworks personal students' into knowledge scientific formal of inclusion the promotes and encourages 121 •

learning and science in Authenticity

122 • Teaching and learning science

will sometimes draw on knowledge and capabilities students already possess and will sometimes require the acquisition and development of new ways

of thinking and acting. Literature and media-based inquiries may require library and archive skills, computer skills or other specialized knowledge and techniques that students do not already possess. Similarly, laboratory-based investigations may require certain bench skills for manipulating materials or the ability to use a range of laboratory instruments to collect accurate data.

Again, students may or may not already have these capabilities. Inquiries may also require additional mathematical skills for manipulating data. The point being made here is that inquiry-based learning provides a stimulus for the acquisition and development of a wide range of new skills, not merely the opportunity to utilize those already perfected. The reporting and communication phase may involve oral and/or written reports, use of diagrams, drawings, charts and graphs, and may involve students in constructing models, taking photographs and making videos. It is in this phase that students learn about the distinctive styles of communication adopted in laboratory and field reports, academic scientific papers, newspaper articles and textbooks, and can contrast them with diaries, logbooks

and interactive journals. Each has a different function, and the form and style of communication reflects both the function and the nature of the anticipated audience.

At each major stage of an inquiry there should be sub-phases in which students plan what to do, do it and review the results — sometimes in collaboration with the teacher, sometimes independently. It is this repeating cycle of planning, acting, reflecting and reviewing that gives inquiry-based methods both their personalized character and their potential for fostering self-directed learning. Because teachers participate extensively and supportively in the inquiry activities and in the various kinds of talking that attend them, they provide a powerful model of good inquiry. However, students

acquire and develop their own skills of inquiry through involvement in inquiry activities: by trying to use them; experiencing success, making mistakes and reflecting on them; gaining feedback, advice and support from the teacher, and perhaps from other students; reformulating their plans; trying again. Through these activities, students refine and develop their existing understanding, learn new skills and acquire new conceptual and procedural knowledge. Of course, language plays a key role throughout these activities — in the negotiation, coordination and management of the group's activities and in deliberation on conceptual and procedural issues arising at each phase of the inquiry. Within groups, language is used for such things as: asking leading questions and making them operational; observing, measuring and deciding how to record data; hypothesizing; identifying trends in data; reasoning, making inferences and drawing conclusions; deciding how to present the report. Students become familiar with what these processes are by using them; they become familiar with what language is appropriate by talking about them — planning, conducting, monitoring and reflecting on them. They also learn

introduction involves It items. vocabulary purpose-built and terms specialist few a acquiring of matter a just not is science of language the Learning practitioners. of ity commun- the by employed systems symbol and language the with familiarity acquiring — apprentice' 'semiotic a being also but apprentice', 'investigative an being just not entails therefore, science, into Enculturation encoded. are scientists of community the of values and traditions historical reference, of frames knowledge, procedural and conceptual the which by means the also is It world. the see can we how and world the see we how both mines deter- possess we language The be. might they how see to us enables also it groups, social various by be to perceived are or are, things why and how understand to us enable it does only Not thinking. our shapes language that established have chapters earlier in discussed perspectives Vygotskian The

science of language the Learning 12. Chapter in elaborated is distinction This inquiry. scientific of characteristics distinctive the on directly based are activities learning the case, second the In knowledge. existing develop and test or knowledge new gain to order in on, so and videos watch people, interview materials, archive other and books use dents stu- where history, as such curriculum, the of areas other in learning based inquiry- with common in much have may inquiry case, first the In study. correlational or experiment through investigation scientific of sense specific more the in inquiry and z') and y x, about out find ('Let's sense general a in inquiry between that is drawn be should that distinction important An efforts. their of outcome the on reflecting and out them trying members, group with and teacher the with procedures the about talking by investigations experimental in variables of manipulation systematic and control about learn students example, For understanding. of framework personal student's the of part becomes teachers and peers with interaction social in mastered and cussed dis- encountered, first is that knowledge procedural and knowledge ceptual con- way, this In activities. group-directed in or independently them use to them, internalized having and, understanding and skills knowledge, expert more teacher's the of aspects key appropriate to learner each enable and development proximal of zone the in attention focus teachers 1992), Wells Chang- and (Wells talk' 'collaborative Through on. passed are understanding and meaning of elements crucial and track' 'on kept are individuals and groups learning that inquiry collaborative of context the in occurring talk teacher—student in is It speech. inner of dialogue intra-mental the becomes interaction social of dialogue inter-mental the processes; internal become acts social words, other In inquiry. of sub-phases and phases the in involved is what internalize students individual experiences, collaborative Through reflecting! and monitoring managing, planning, of processes the about 123 •

learning and science in Authenticity

124 • Teaching and learning science

to, and gaining familiarity with, what Lemke (1990) calls the 'thematic patterns' of science — the ways in which concepts and ideas are related within a much broader network of interdependent meanings. It also entails getting

used to some of the other distinctive features of scientific language: the tendency to utilize universal rather than particularistic meanings; the use of technical terms and symbols in preference to colloquial terms; and the use of familiar everyday words in restricted and specialized ways. Scientific reporting is distinctive in being expository, analytical and impersonal, and making little or no use of metaphoric or figurative language. Enculturation entails being able to use this language appropriately and being able to present ideas and findings in the distinctive genres of science, particularly the scientific paper and the laboratory or fieldwork report. Lemke (1990: 22) argues at some length that many science teachers seem to expect all this to occur unaided:

Students are not taught how to talk science: how to put together workable science sentences and paragraphs, how to combine terms and mean-

ings, how to speak, argue, analyze, or write science. It seems to be taken for granted that they will just 'catch on' to how to do so .

When they don't catch on, we conclude that they weren't bright enough

or didn't try hard enough. But we don't directly teach them how to. The notion of apprenticeship implies that students will learn the language of science by interaction with someone who is already an expert, and by using it themselves in carrying out authentic tasks. Thus, teachers should model appropriate language use, make explicit reference to its distinctive features, provide language-based activities that focus on them, create opportunities for students to act as autonomous users of the language and provide critical feedback on their success in doing so. There also needs to be much more metatalk (talk about talk), with teachers explaining why they are adopting

a particular linguistic form. Students need to know that while everyday language will suffice on some occasions, a specialized language of science is necessary on others. They need to know the circumstances in which different codes are applicable and they need lots of practice in switching between them. As an aside, it is worth noting Lemke's (1990) observation that students pay much more attention to what is being said when teachers shift from the formal language of science to the colloquialisms of everyday speech, adopt more humanized ways of talking about science and lace their explanations

with humour and references to personal experience. This should not be interpreted as a case for abandoning scientific language in class in favour of the colloquial. It is a case, however, for a more thoughtful use of familiar language to assist learning, and it is a case for helping students to recognize how the language of science is used, consciously and unconsciously, to disadvantage, exclude, alienate and disempower. It is also a case for students to acquire a self-conscious and critical understanding of the language of science and the ability to use it in pursuit of their own and the local community's interests.

science. normal and revolutionary between distinction Kuhniari the parallels also concepts) new of addition and ships relation- new of (establishment restructuring weak and interrelations) their and concepts core in (changes restructuring strong between distinction (1986) Carey's

1

Notes change. social effect to technology, and science of discourse the especially discourses, powerful of range a use to enabled are students that ensure to is which of goal ultimate the education, science of politicization the of aspect crucial a is This familiarity. little yet, as have, they which with those in inherent power the by manipulated or intimidated be to not and discourse, of modes other use to when and how learn they that is important Equally guage. lan- social everyday familiar own their including discourse, of modes and genres speech different of location sociocultural the recognize students that important is It genres. speech and languages social of range a properly, use to ability and of, knowledge include to expanded be now can understanding of framework personal a of notion The lines. just socially more along society rebuilding and crossings border facilitating in step major a take to is rooms class- in used language the of aspects all permeate meanings determined culturally and values which in ways the acknowledge to and classroom the of context sociopolitical the recognize To education. science satisfactory a from students of numbers significant of exclusion continued the and quo status political the of perpetuation the ensure to is events, classroom nate impreg- not do relationships power if as act to and matters, these ignore To society. in ent inher- already are that inequalities racial and class social the perpetuate to serves that power of instrument an becomes schooling terms, their on occur only can dialogue that insist teachers that extent the and fore, there- experience, lived their from develop students that voices stituted con- socioculturally subjective, the negates schooling that extent the To says: 816) (1992: O'Loughlin As privilege. of perpetuation and opportunity of suppression continuing a in implicated becomes science school inferior, as rejected specifically or disregarded are children some of frameworks pretive inter- and genres speech the When valued. not are cultures and voices their that learn quickly who SES, low and minorities ethnic of children exclude to and children middle-class for opportunity promote to serves that aspirations and values middle-class of reflection unconscious or conscious a is there classrooms most In why? And heard? are voices Whose promoted? being is reality of view Whose raised. are power and culture authority, of questions important meaning, of cargo sociopolitical accompanying its and guage, lan- of location sociocultural the concerning discussion earlier the Given 125 •

learning and science in Authenticity

126 • Teaching and learning science 2 It is surprising how often 'context' is left undefined. Frequently, readers are left to judge for themselves whether the writer is referring to the physical context, the immediate social context, the wider cultural context or the specific cognitive context of the problem. Each of these meanings has been employed somewhere in this book, and many of them are used in this chapter. My hope is that definition has been made apparent by the context in which it has been used! 3 It follows that the wider the range of contexts experienced, the more likely it is that contextually relevant items can be accessed — a conclusion with some important curriculum implications.

education, science of context the in and, understanding of framework sonal per- robust more and richer broader, deeper, a building in students assist to is teaching of goals the of One customs. and values beliefs, knowledge, mined deter- socioculturally and attitudes emotions, feelings, experience, personal of elements substantial include understanding of frameworks personal these Moreover, views. erroneous entirely some course, of them, among — views contradictory sometimes and diverse of multitude a hold can students which within and understanding,' of framework personal a called have I which event, or phenomenon given any around understanding of web complex a vidual, indi- each for create, perspectives different These world. our of (meanings) perspectives multiple holding of capable all are we contexts, of multiplicity a among and between move all we Since context. problem specific the as well as context, cultural wider the and context social immediate the context, sical phy- the includes where — context to unique even sometimes, and, way one's that is point fundamental The context to is relative thinking of contexts. social and situations problem of variety a in it use to how and access to knowledge what knowing (c) text; con- by determined are knowledge of usefulness and appropriateness the that appreciating (b) too); methods, alternative (and exist explanations and conceptions alternative that recognizing (a) includes: that understanding order second the acquire they that ensure to need also we understanding, their to add to ability the develop students that ensure to need we do only Not understanding. trusted previous, their up giving necessarily without knowledge, their of applicability of range and usefulness the extend to order in understanding, of framework personal their into relationships new and connotations additional meaning, of aspects different incorporate to able are they that recognized not have students that is problem the Rather, change. to resistant are conceptions alternative these that it is Nor views. scientific with incompatible are that events and phenomena of conceptions have times some- students that not is education science in problem major the Perhaps

assimilation

without enculturation line: the Walking

...11

128 • Teaching and learning science scientific meanings. A furthis means helping them to incorporate ther goal is assisting them in recognizing the boundaries for applicability of different ways of knowing, and then learning how to effect successful border crossings, how to move freely between different ways of knowing and different kinds of discourse. Just as much emphasis is needed, therefore, on enhancing students' ability to recognize when to use a particular aspect of their existing understanding as on building new understanding. In other words, emphasis should also focus on being able to appreciate the functional appropriateness of different aspects of one's personal framework of understanding. There are two major aspects to this understanding:

• knowing when to use science, rather than some other way of knowing; • knowing when to use a particular chunk of scientific knowledge (a particular model, theory, technique or procedure), rather than some other.

Science and everyday knowledge As stated earlier, my notion of a personal framework of understanding is such that taking on new meaning doesn't necessarily entail relinquishing the old. New and old meanings can exist side-by-side. Scientific understanding that cucumbers and tomatoes are fruit, for example, does not preclude the commonsense understanding that they are located in the vegetable section of the grocery store, together with plant roots, tubers and leaves. What

is important is recognizing when particular meanings are appropriate and being able to use them properly in the appropriate discourse. There are situations in which the scientific approach has very obvious utility; for certain types of question it can provide a well tested and powerful answer. In other situations, everyday knowledge is far more useful and appropriate. A central goal of science education is to show students when their own needs and purposes are best served by scientific knowledge and scientific ways of proceeding, and when they are better served by other ways of knowing and acting. It should be noted, however, that some students may be resistant to the notion that there are different ways of perceiving things and to the view that concepts used in science are more fluid than textbooks sometimes claim and public understanding usually declares. They may want to know the proper or true version! Overcoming this problem is part of the learning about science component of the curriculum. Perhaps Black and Lucas (1993) put their finger on the essence of this notion when they use the term informal ideas' in science. All of us have informal ideas, including scientists. It is OK to have them. What is important is that we know when their use is acceptable and when it is important to use the more formal understanding established by the scientific community. When scientific meanings are added to a learner's personal framework of understanding, they may replace an existing idea, cause it to be modified or exist alongside it. Admixture of formal scientific knowledge

employed, thoughtfully if itself, work laboratory words, other In 1996). 1991, (White knowledge episodic of stock student's each up building by 'upwards' knowledge everyday of development the assist and abstractions, scientific of manifestations concrete providing by 'downwards' concepts scientific of development the assist experience fieldwork and laboratory that argued is it 12, Chapter In teachers. for attention of focus major a be should interaction of point this that follows it ideas, Vygotskian in rooted firmly is enculturation as education science of notion the Because understanding. everyday and concepts scientific between interaction the to refer to development imal prox- of zone term the used first Vygotsky (1990), Kozulin to According not. sometimes and them, in change precipitating times some- concepts, everyday with further interact they so, do they As 220). (ibid.: experience' personal of domain the into concrete, the of domain the into downward 'grow they developed, are concepts scientific as Moreover, exist.' previously which generalization of forms elementary more and lower the by provided foundation the on only head child's the in 'arise can they words, 177) (1987: Vygotsky's In understanding. everyday on extent, an to depend, concepts scientific of intelligibility and plausibility the However, understandings. interrelated of systems generalized into others with linked notions idealized and abstract as down', 'top the from constructed are cepts con- scientific contrast, By concepts. other from isolated and to unrelated part, most the for and, local remain they meaning, personal in rich are they while and up', 'bottom the from constructed are — them calls (1962) Vygotsky as concepts', 'spontaneous — knowledge everyday in concepts the that recognizing example, for differ: and compare stores knowledge two these how of appreciation an developing by assisted be can again) back (and ing understand- scientific to understanding everyday from border the Crossing

knowledge scientific about Learning autonomy. learner of measure a retain while the all and personal, the sacrificing without understandings scientific necessary the develop to how is question important The ideas. scientific of world the (c) world; real the in events and phenomena objects, (b) understanding; current our (a) among: connections make to attempt we as development and modification continual to subject are understanding of frameworks personal Our changed. become understanding and ledge know- our thereby, and, world the with interact to knowledge our use We ive. reflex- are structures theoretical our Moreover, purposes. different of pursuit in roles different and status different have understanding of framework sonal per- individual's an in elements Different purposes. different for and sions occa- different on used are they because precisely other each from separate largely and alongside exist can informal and Formal differently. stored and encoded be may informal) and (formal knowledge everyday and academic because level, intuitive more a at change a about bring always not may 129 • assimilation

without enculturation line: the Walking

130 • Teaching and learning science

is located in the zone of proximal development and so can be considered a major Vygotskian strategy. In a sense, by simplifying, selecting and idealizing real experience, the contrived experiences of well designed laboratory work and fieldwork constitute a kind of scaffolding. When moving from commonsense understanding to scientific understanding, we don't just change the content of our understanding, we significantly change its character, towards one that is systematic, coherent, analytical and mathematical. Rowe (1973: 7) has observed that 'while inconsistencies in results among ideas may not disturb the beginner, they become intolerable to the more advanced learner, who begins to be governed by an accumulated set of relationships which he [sic] expects to hold true.' In part, this is because 'more advanced' learners have begun to recognize that science is more than a collection of context-specific explanations. Rather, it is a set of interrelated concepts and conceptual structures that aims to produce generalizable and universalist knowledge (Matthews 1994). But achieving that awareness is sometimes a long and difficult process. Children may sometimes use quite different ideas about an entity to explain its behaviour in different contexts — for example, different views about wood in the context of plant growth and the context of fuel (Barker and Carr 1989). They may switch from one sort of explanation to another for the same phenomenon — for example, using explanations based on weight, size, surface area, texture, the presence or absence of holes and so on, for floating and sinking. As Driver eta!. (1985: 3) comment: The need for coherence, and the criteria for coherence, as perceived by a student are not the same as those of the scientist: the student does not

possess any unique model unifying a range of phenomena that the scientist considers as equivalent. Nor does the student necessarily see the need for a coherent view, since ad hoc interpretations and predictions about natural events may appear to work quite well in practice. Nor will children be able to differentiate between theory and evidence, unless they are taught. Failure to appreciate the proper relationship between theory and evidence, says Kuhn (1989), can lead to excessive theory-dependence, a state in which no discrepant events can be recognized as more than merely 'rogue data'. Paradoxically, it can also lead to acute data-dependence, a state

in which students are unable to make the critical judgements necessary to interpret and rationalize data because they are unwilling to rely on any theory at all.

Students who have not learned that scientific theory is coherent and consistent, and who do not understand the relationship between hypothesis and evidence, and among theory, observation and experiment, are rooted in a 'methodology of superficiality' (Gil-Perez and Carrascosa-Alis 1985) that cannot lead beyond commonsense knowledge. What is needed to effect the transition to more sophisticated conceptual understanding is more sophisticated understanding of the nature of science — in particular, understanding of theories as complex structures rather than simple statements, experiments

associations occasional only expect who those while problems, addressing in such as it use to likely are reason and argue explain, to used be can that structure conceptual consistent and coherent a as science see who Those situations. problem in knowledge scientific use they how and learning view they how to relates continua two these on beliefs student of location The events. and nomena phe- into insight giving of capable knowledge conceptual as science to problems to solutions correct gaining for formulae of set a as science from • systems');

'coherent prefer would I (though concepts interrelated of system coherent a as science to information of bits separate of collection a as science from • continua: two on located as beliefs epistemological students' describes (1994) Hammer crossings. border smoother to passport the is choose to 'map' which knowing students, For connoisseurship. scientific of part key a is stances circum- particular in use to 'map' which Knowing themselves. find they which in situation the to according and them to available 'maps' the from unconsciously) or (consciously choose they 2); (Chapter knowledge their use and organize they which in ways the in themselves among differ ists Scient- understanding. of framework personal our constitute together which us, to available 'maps' different of number a has us of each but person, to person from differ 'maps' these do only Not features. geographical or tion popula- rainfall, represent to organized be can maps of series a like rather ways, different of number a in arranged be can ideas and concepts These differentiation'). 'progressive call (1978) al. et Ausubel (what restructuring and reorganization by and capture') 'conceptual calls (1981) Hewson (what ideas and concepts of addition by complex more become understanding of frameworks personal their too, things, other of more and science more learn individuals As crossing. border of problems to contribute would it because second, portrayal; true entirely an not is it because first, knowledge: scientific of coherence overall the over-emphasize to not important is It

profile epistemological an Developing things. viewing of way scientific more a to committed and with familiar those by fruitful more as recognized be only therefore, may, They views. everyday than understand to difficult more often and abstract more are conceptions Science model. enculturation an on based education science to essential is science of sociology and philosophy history, the in located ing teach- Therefore, taught. be must They unaided. issues philosophical these understand and about know to come not will students But inappropriate. and appropriate is use its when crucially, and, knowledge that of status and role the knowledge, new validates and generates scientists of community the which in ways the building, theory and testing theory both to central as 131 •

assimilation without enculturation line: the Walking

132 • Teaching and learning science

between conceptual knowledge and class tasks are likely to try to apply algorithms in order to solve problems. In short, those with some understanding of the structure of scientific knowledge view learning as applying and modifying personal understanding, while those who don't have this understanding view learning as the storing of knowledge provided by an authority (the teacher or the textbook). In other words, learning more about science contributes very substantially to increasing scientific expertise and intellectual independence. Mortimer (1995) has developed the notion of an 'epistemological profile' for concepts in physics, in which the earliest form of the concept is the realist level, corresponding to our everyday notions and strongly rooted in commonsense understanding. Then comes the empiricist level: understanding

located in careful observation and precise measurement. Next comes the rational classic level: formal abstract knowledge located within a Newtonian

framework. Finally, with an appreciation of relativity theory, the concept reaches the rational modern level. For any particular concept, epistemological profiles will differ between individuals in direct relation to their education and experience; and for any one individual, profiles will differ from concept

to concept, with some concepts understood at high levels, others at relatively lower levels and some at the lowest level of all. Teaching and learning science has two goals: first, to lead students through this profile of development at an appropriate pace; second, to ensure that students become selfconsciously aware of the existence of such a profile. In other words, students should know that concepts may have this history of development, and they should know, for any particular concept, where their own understanding is located. Such self-conscious understanding might also provide students with some guidance on how best to proceed in directing their own learning and

in determining what further knowledge and/or experience to seek. This could be interpreted as self-consciousness playing a role in shifting students from a performance orientation to a mastery orientation.

It is worth noting, once more, that development of understanding of a concept at a new, higher level does not necessarily entail its usefulness at a lower level being at an end. As discussed previously, a superseded theory can still be employed as a model by scientists seeking to gain a measure of control and predictive capability. Similar opportunities are available to all: each of us is entitled to pitch the level of sophistication of an explanation in relation to the task in hand. Understanding the nature of epistemological profiles includes understanding how to select the level appropriate to the context. Thus, in addition to learning which concepts to employ, depending on the task in hand, students need to learn which epistemological level of that concept is appropriate. This decision is influenced by the matter being addressed and by the levels of understanding of those with whom the student wishes to communicate. In other words, it depends on the social context as well as on the problem context. Two further points are worth making. First, in Vygotskian terms, the transitions between levels in the profile constitute zones of proximal development

their in errors perceive students how influences also understanding This learning. in successful more general, in are, ideas other with in fits it why and how question to knowledge, own their about reason to learn who those not; do who those than learners successful and effective more far are ing learn- their regulate and monitor to how know and understand who Those themselves. about views their and world the of views own their construct co- and construct they as just processes, learning own their of standing under- an support, teacher with co-construct or construct, can Students independence. intellectual of heart the at course, of also, are They motivation. good to essential are learning one's of control in being of feelings 6, Chapter in discussed As competence. and control of feelings to key important one is successfully more learn to how Learning learning. own their of, control and of, understanding deeper much a and learning and thinking of processes the of knowledge generalized a students give that methods other and these on placed be to needs classrooms science in emphasis more Much strategies. learning productive more developing in part a play can and histories, ing learn- own their and processes thought own their into insight students give to help also strategies These issues. epistemological on reflecting of habit the acquire students help to used be can diagrams Vee and maps concept which in ways the on advice useful much provides 1990) (1989, Novak taught. be to have also it, drives that commitment attitudinal the and reflection, critical in engage to capacity the However, connoisseurship. towards development continued for base the is that learning of processes and understanding own one's on reflection critical is It thinking. creative to key the also but learning, further to spur a only not is understanding of framework personal own one's change to potential the Achieving learning. own one's control and understand to and matters these of understanding own one's on reflect to capacity the is crucial Also

learning about Learning education. science to central is therefore, mitment, com- and understanding of kind this Gaining here. discussion under matters the to attention pay to them requires and difficult, more is fruitful, more be to likely are described being ideas new the that and ideas, existing their with dissatisfied be should they that students convincing However, plausible. as idea new a see students that ensure to sufficient often is demonstration good a by reinforced authority teacher that and etc.) problems standard through working exercises, practical methods, (question—answer methods teaching conventional by served well reasonably usually is intelligibility of condition (1982) al.'s et Posner that argue (1989) Gunstone and White point, similar a making In idea. particular a of fruitfulness and plausibility intelligibility, the of evaluation an to related also is It crossings. border smooth achieving to keys the of one be may profile epistemological an within levels different at work to ability the Second, necessary. be may scaffolding which within 133 •

assimilation without enculturation line: the Walking

134 • Teaching and learning science

evidence of failure or as a source of useful information for modifying future actions. By how to learn' I do not mean the various memory tricks, 'superlearning' techniques and test-taking strategies that claim to raise performance test scores (important though these may be for some students in the short term), nor the generalized study skills tips that promote techniques for improving concentration levels and for managing time more efficiently, though these too are of value for many students. Rather, I am concerned with learner behaviours that promote deeper processing and reflection on ideas and their deployment. Teachers in the PEEL project identified a number of student behaviours that militate against good learning, such as rarely contributing to discussions, not reading instructions and test work — as

questions carefully, regarding assessment tasks as subsequent to learning (rather

than part of it) and not relating lesson material to existing knowledge and previous experience (Mitchell and Mitchell 1992). They also identified some productive learning behaviours, including: willingness to comrnimicate promptly

with the teacher when they don't understand or perceive that they have insufficient information; checking their work (and the teacher's work) for errors; actively searching for links to existing knowledge and previous experiences; willingness to proffer their own views and experiences, and to challenge and criticize the views of others, including the teacher's. Over 70 procedures to foster good learning behaviours and inhibit poor ones have been developed (Baird and Northfield 1992). For example, working in groups to formulate suitable sub-headings for insertion in text encourages more careful reading; deleting unnecessary data from instructions for laboratory tasks encourages a more minds-on approach to practical work; and contributing items for inclusion in the end-of-topic test or end-of-year examination encourages students to take greater responsibility for their learning. However, as mentioned in Chapter 4, a wide variety of metacognitive activities should be employed, because students quickly routinize any task and may fake good learning behaviour in order to win teacher approval (White and Mitchell 1994).

Understanding and believing Despite their fragmentary and localized character, personal frameworks of understanding exhibit some interesting overarching interpretive structures (Bloom 1992, 1995), though these also change over time and may vary quite substantially from individual to individual, according to sociocultural environment. Anthropocentrism, anthropomorphism and zoomorphism are often dominant viewpoints for young students, guiding much of their thinking and contributing very substantially to their personal understanding. More sophisticated scientific knowledge doesn't necessarily displace these ways of

thinking, though it may help students to view them more objectively. In parallel with Toulmin's (1972) identification of an individual's epistemological and metaphysical beliefs as a central aspect of conceptual ecology

knowledge, Aboriginal of perspectives holistic the are Nor explanations. istic mechan- on based knowledge objective through nature of mastery achieve to science Western of drive the with sympathy in not are mystery of tion celebra- and coexistence survival, in people Nations First of interests the how describes 220) (1997: Aikenhead matters. such about presuppositions mental funda- student's a with conflict in be may features these when recognize to and existence) and being of nature the about assumes and knows it (what science of aspects metaphysical the unpack to us helps theory Worldview comprehends. one which that true as accept to comes one which by process metaphysical a is believing But earlier). discussed emphasis science about learning the of goal (the understanding particular for case epistemological an builds one thinking, By believing. and understanding knowing, and thinking between distinguishing in helpful particularly be can theory Worldview

understanding. of pursuit the is purpose principal the Rather, education. science of purposes the of one as seen not is beliefs particular of promotion The learning. on influence profound a having as recognized are philosophy) and religion (including knowing' of 'ways other in located beliefs and beliefs personal Informal knowledge. scientific of status and role the of consideration critical a include to assumed is science about Learning science. learning of goal principal understanding of framework personal a of Development the as taken

is

•

• • •

discussion: further of purposes the for that say to it Suffice book. this of scope the outside are that understanding and knowledge belief, among relationships the about questions of kinds all raise points These students. some for science of subculture the into ings cross- border impossible or hazardous creating thus science, of underpinnings metaphysical fundamental the with incompatible be could it how see to easy relatively is it world, the in place humanity's about and causality about beliefs fundamental includes worldview a Because it. about knowledge valid and important as counts what therefore, and, like really is world the what about presuppositions comprise collectively which — space time, causality, relationships, classification, other, or non-self self, — categories structural logico- seven includes worldview a 1996), (1991, Cobern to According communities. multi-ethnic in and societies Western non- in science teaching for issues important some raises This 1995). al. et (Ogunniyi world natural the with interact and conceptualize teachers) and

students course, of (including, people way the in differences cross-cultural significant very be to likely are there consequence, a As ways. particular in act and think feel, to people predispose that it) about knowledge gains one how and reality of nature the about unconsciously, or consciously held beliefs, of (sets worldviews different produce environments cultural different that argues (1993) Cobern coherence, and stability its understanding personal gives that 135 •

assimilation without enculturation line: the Walking

136 • Teaching and learning science

with its 'gentle, accommodating, intuitive, and spiritual wisdom' in sympathy with reductionist Western science and its 'aggressive, manipulative, mechanistic, and analytical explanations'. Border crossing is inhibited not so much by the cognitive demand of the learning task as by the discomfort caused by some of the distinctive features of science, features that are often exaggerated and distorted by school curricula into a sdentistic cocktail of naive realism, blissful empiricism, credulous experimentation, excessive rationalism and blind idealism (Nadeau and Desautels 1984). Clearly, those with a pre-existing worldview that is in harmony with the

scientific perspective will find it easier to learn science because it 'makes sense' to them in terms of fundamental assumptions and underlying values. Science teaching will support and enhance their pre-existing worldview. Those whose woridview differs substantially may experience difficulties in learning science. As Cobern (1995: 289) says, 'One scientist trying to convince a colleague, or even a scientist from another field, is not the same as trying to convince those outside the scientific community.' When there is a clash of worldviews the situation is, he says, like Charles Darwin presenting his Origin of Species to a public with very different, religion-based views of origins. Speaker and audience don't share the same fundamental ideas about the world and so may 'talk past each other'. Mutual incomprehension is, indeed, a poor basis for effective teacher—student relationships! Problems of this kind have been identified by Kawasaki (1996) and Jegede

(1998), but are not restricted to the Japanese and African students these authors describe. They exist for Europeans and Americans, too, especially if they have strong religious or aesthetic conceptions of the natural world (Cobern 1996; Roth and Alexander 1997). The problems run considerably deeper than cognitive or epistemological concerns. Science teaching may threaten, disrupt, overpower, marginalize and eventually replace longstanding beliefs and values that underpin some students' sense of personal and cultural identity — in other words, students become assimilated. Alternatively, students may simply resist this perceived attempt at displacing their woridview and decide that science is not for them. Interestingly, strongly held beliefs do not always prevent students from understanding and being able to use scientific knowledge that contradicts them. For example, Demastes eta!. (1995) show that students can construct a perfectly adequate scientific understanding of evolution despite a clear rejection of its truthfulness that is rooted in strong religious beliefs. Both knowledge structures (evolution and

creationism) can be part of an individual's personal framework of understanding, because they are used for different purposes. In some ways, this reflects the distinction between scientific theories, taken as 'true' descriptions and explanations in the sense discussed by Hodson (1982), and scientific models, used for their predictive capability but not regarded as true. Moreover, as Ogunniyi et a!. (1995: 822) observe, 'the Japanese never lost their cultural identity when introducing Western science and technology, because they introduced only the practical products of Western science and technology, never its epistemology or worldviews'.

foster to likely more is 2) Chapter (see curriculum issues-based politicized, A globally. and locally both environment, the on and families and friends their of lives the on students, all of lives the on impacts science how students shows that curriculum a requires also It settings. social different between comfortably and freely move themselves, can, who teachers on value high a places and justice social of ideal the centralizes self-worth, and belonging of sense a feel students all that ensures differences, values that culture school a of creation the entails This classroom. science the outside lives their of features important suppress or up give to students require not does science to access gaining that clear make to importance paramount of is It studies. epistemological and skills language science of promotion pedagogy, sensitive culturally of tion adop- support, career of provision including effect, can teachers science that changes emphasizes (1994) Pomeroy friendships; new and interests new fostering involve which of many adopt, to encouraged be might students that strategies the of some describe (1991) al. et Phelan stress. emotional excessive of face the in quit who or difficulties, experience currently who students those for eased be can science school of culture the into transition which in ways the of cognizant more be to need teachers science too, Clearly, class. the in represented are that own their than other subcultures the about and science about do sometimes they than more much know to need teachers dictate, circumstances social as forwards and backwards freely cross to them enabling subcultures, between crossings border smooth ing effect- in students assist To students. to even and teachers, to invisible seem can and unrecognized often are subcultures between borders the tunately, Unfor- access. of problems to rise give that subcultures various these among and between conflicts is It them. to unique are that others and common are that ways some in experience will students individual that learning for context sociocultural unique a forge will and different, be will subcultures of complex this students, of class each For represented. all are science of views), religious course, of ing, culture the and culture school culture, (includ- community local the of culture the culture, child or adolescent culture, gender that in multicultural, as regarded be can composition, ethnic their whatever classrooms, science all out, points (1996) Krugly-Smolska As

crossings border Assisting classrooms. all in students all to extended be to continuum, a on located secured), and dependent simultaneous, (parallel, learning collateral of categories four of description Jegede's for allows context, learning unique a creating as encounter educational each regarding and understanding, of framework personal unique a of possession in being as individual each Regarding understanding. and knowledge African traditional alongside thinking scientific Western develop and hold can individuals how describe to learning collateral of notion the developed has (1995) Jegede 137 • assimilation

without enculturation line: the Walking

138 • Teaching and learning science

the notion that science is a culturally embedded activity, and to direct atten-

tion to the conflicts of interests and values that exist within and between societies, than the more usual academic, abstract, theoretical approach. By confronting scientific and technological problems located in different sociocultural contexts, and dealing with controversial issues, students recognize 'multiple realities' within the classroom and across other cultural boundaries. What I am moving towards is the notion that border crossings are eased by helping students to become more conscious of what is involved in border crossing — yet another aspect of metacognitive awareness, advocated several times previously as a key element in bringing about better learning in sci-

ence. What I am seeking is a kind of 'cultural awareness' that involves students understanding the social location of beliefs and practices, acknow-

ledging the context-dependence of most of what they think and do and recognizing the existence of different modes of discourse, each having a distinctive sociocultural origin. Part of this cultural awareness entails recognizing that science itself is a subculture, with its own distinctive knowledge, language, methods, rationality, criteria of validity and reliability, and values; part entails students reflecting on their personal frameworks of understanding and considering carefully the circumstances in which they came to hold particular views and develop particular skills. As with constructivist pedagogy (Chapter 4), the first step is for teachers to gain insight into the unique structure of each student's personal framework of understanding. Bloom (1995) shows how sensitive use of a form of concept mapping he calls 'context mapping' can begin to provide teachers with this information. However, it should be noted that:

• total insight is not possible, even if it were desirable;2 • techniques of research and assessment/evaluation can provide only limited insight; • students may wish to conceal some aspects of their understanding; • the act of inquiring may precipitate change in students' understanding; • personal frameworks of understanding are in constant flux and change; • other events, of which the teacher may be entirely unaware, may 'colour' the particular selection from their personal framework of understanding that students make available at any one time.

These considerations account for some of the problems encountered by researchers into children's conceptual understanding in science. Testing is a novel social and cognitive experience that demands a particular kind of intellectual manoeuvre and response. Children unfamiliar with this situation will often be unable to respond properly or will simply provide an answer (any answer) they believe will satisfy the questioner, rather than struggle to understand a style of question that seems incomprehensible to them. This concern is highlighted by Hughes and Grieve's (1983) work showing that young children will readily provide adults with answers to the most bizarre questions (such as 'Which is heavier: yellow or red?'). Of course, children don't have views on these matters, but they are willing to

As lens. social/affective a and knowledge) own their at in looking is dent stu- (the lens epistemological an world), the at out looking is student (the lens ontological an lenses: three through viewed be to change conceptual for case a make they when similar something suggest (1997) al. et Tyson inquiry. scientific and ledge know- scientific underpin that positions value and considerations metaphysical fundamental the understand to need also Students assimilation. without enculturation for insufficient are they — 1996) (Gil-Perez researcher' novice as 'student — metaphor useful another for framework useful a comprise and important, are these While idea. new a of validity the for argument clear a and events discrepant providing of matter a just isn't understanding personal for Teaching are). assumptions and beliefs fundamental its what (i.e. from' coming is it 'where understand they if level) personal a at is, (that properly science understand only can students that is argument My sojourn. their

after unharmed leave to course, of and, 1996); Aikenhead 1994; (Pomeroy them between and within painlessly and freely moving in them assist to and conduct) of code and attitudes values, theories, beliefs, language, its with each science, school and school science, of subcultures (the cultures alien are many, for what, of understanding an gain to students help to job teacher's the of part is It anthropologist. as teacher another: for room is there Perhaps on. so and guide tour as teacher gardener, as teacher broadcaster, as teacher metaphors: with replete is education teacher of literature The

anthropologist as teacher Science strategy. research a as well as awareness', 'cultural to aid an as and strategy teaching useful a as this suggesting am I appropriate. being as them regard they circumstances what in and area, subject this in have children strategies solving problem- and understanding other what into enquire and further, probe might they Then understanding. individual of complexity the into insight some gain might teachers way, this In interviews. such of transcripts from maps concept constructing suggests (1996) Cobern and response, particular a give they why students ask to researchers urges (1989) Millar simply, More ing). understand- of aspects different sample to tasks related (employ triangulate grounds'; neutral 'on interpret both); to accessible but reference, of frame either in located (not tasks' 'neutral find threefold: is solution Their scientist. seventeenth-century a of thinking the into insight gain to trying scientist twentieth-century a of that like rather say, they is, situation The nication. commu- meaningful establish and other each understand can they whether on doubt casts that researcher and child of reference of frames different the between interface' 'translation a to refer (1996) Gott and Johnson response. the determined have ing, understand- than rather circumstances, Social please. to anxious merely are They questioner. the disappoint than rather answer) (any answer an provide 139 • assimilation

without enculturation line: the Walking

140 • Teaching and learning science Aims and objectives Assessment and evaluation procedures

\

Teaching and

Purpose of science

Content I

/

I

/

Conceptual migration

learning methods (a) Model for rational curriculum planning Figure 11.1

.

.

Critical Scientific appraisal, knowledge validation and publication Scientific

methods and processes

(b) Model for teaching and learning about science

Adapting a model from curriculum theory.

Source: Hodson 1993d.

they say, and as I have argued throughout this book, all three aspects impact on learning and can impede or facilitate border crossings. However, their

model is too static and too 'logical' for my purposes. Above all, it is too impatient of culturally determined differences in worldview: 'students have to stop thinking of concepts like heat, light, force, and current as material substances' (Tyson et al. 1997: 400, my emphasis). The approach I am seeking does not equate understanding with belief, nor does it seek to displace

other worldviews with the 'approved' scientific view. Rather, it seeks to equip students with the knowledge, self-knowledge and confidence to move freely between them. Aikenhead (1996: 41) expresses this view particularly well.

Border crossings may be facilitated in classrooms by studying the subcultures of students' life-worlds and by contrasting them with a critical analysis of the subculture of science (its norms, values, beliefs, expectations, and conventional actions), consciously moving back and forth between life-worlds and the science-world, switching language conventions explicitly, switching conceptualizations explicitly, switching values explicitly, switching epistemologies explicitly. Some years ago, in making a similar case for a more explicit consideration of

the nature of science, I suggested that teachers might find it interesting, helpful and amusing to 'borrow' the familiar model of 'rational curriculum planning' and adapt it to the task of describing the scientific enterprise in terms of purpose, knowledge store, methods of inquiry and procedures for evaluation (Figure 11.1).

I am now inclined to believe that this doesn't go 'far enough' or 'deep enough', and that students' interests might be better served by deploying the more socially oriented approach of King and Brownell (1966), who describe the disciplines (including science) in terms of eight characteristics.

as worldviews, and structures knowledge different between confidently and freely pass can students which in learning, collateral secured of goal (1995) Jegede's achieving of means principal the perhaps, is, teaching') 'multisciences calls (1995) Ogawa (what science indigenous and knowing everyday including etc.), religion (philosophy, knowing of ways other with science of parison com- explicit The 1998). (Hodson etc.) science feminist science, (African 'sciences' other and knowing of ways other with not) (or correspondence its and science of rationality the about questions address should and tice, prac- masculine and ethnocentred) white (i.e. American North or European exclusively an is science that notion the dispelling to attention particular pay should science demythologizing Consequently, science. of community the into crossing border successful to barriers greatest the experience often who groups minority ethnic of members and students female course, of is, It

attitudes. these possess scientists All 10 science. of practice effective the to essential are attitudes' 'scientific so-called The 9 activity. post-Renaissance Western, exclusively an is Science 8 activity. value-free a is Science 7 procedure. algorithmic simple, a is inquiry Scientific 6 processes. comprises Science 5 generic discrete, decisive. are Experiments 4 induction. via proceeds Science 3 observation. with starts Science 2 knowledge. secure to access reliable and direct provides Observation 1 myths.3 ten following the are science of distortion this in Prominent curricula. science school by projected commonly are that science about falsehoods and distortions many the dispelling and fronting con- involves students to explicit them making and matters these Studying

aesthetics. (scientific) and dynamism emotional of complex a and being of nature the about beliefs fundamental — stance affective and valuative a As argument. of form distinctive a as well as accurately, and quickly meaning conveying for shorthand' 'intellectual of form a — language specialized a As theories. — structure substantive a As and models 'laws', concepts, of array an knowledge. new validating and generating for methods — of collection and inquiry of mode distinctive a structure syntactical a As forebears. its of — discourse and activities the on built is and history a has it tradition a As interest. and concern — of sphere particular its develops and defines discipline each domain a As intelligences. multiple of notion (1984) Gardner's with common in much has that idea an — imagination human of expression particular a As understanding. building to commitment — intellectual common a with people competent of corps a community a As 141 •

• • • • • • • •

assimilation without enculturation line: the Walking

142 • Teaching and learning science the need arises. Roberts (1998) provides a particularly graphic example of teaching' in her comparison of the indigenous knowledge of the Pacific Islands peoples with Western science, in terms of its empirical database, theory building and predictive capability, testability, cause and effect, context specificity and so on. As a tailpiece to this chapter, it is worth noting the frequency with which metacognition, other forms of self-knowledge and the notion of reconstructing understanding under the watchful and supportive eye of an expert have arisen as key elements in the personalization of learning. Reconstructing and extending one's personal framework of understanding with respect to an identified set of chosen roles, developing better learning strategies, reflecting on the nature of science and scientific inquiry, achieving knowledge of self as student and as sociocultural being and knowing how to reconstruct it have all been discussed. Similar matters arise at least twice more, in Chapters 12 and 13, in the guise of reflection on and reconstruction of learners' views of themselves as effective inquirers and, in particular, as scientific investigators.

Notes 1 A number of writers, including Strike and Posner (1985, 1992), Hewson and Thorley (1989) and Demastes et al. (1995), have used Toulmin's (1972) metaphor of a conceptual ecology (a complex of ideas, analogies, metaphors and beliefs) to describe personal understanding. 2 This reference to desirability is in respect of ethical issues that could be raised by probing too deeply into students' personal frameworks of understanding. 3 I am not claiming that all ten myths are promoted by all science curricula. Rather, most curricula promote one or more of them and, across the range of curricular provision, all ten are in evidence.

relationship the of misunderstandings serious are these view, my In ments. experi- means necessarily benchwork that and benchwork means necessarily work practical that assumed been has it Moreover, experience. common a through simultaneously, achieved be can goals different significantly these that assumed been has it often, Too another. from so be not may orientations these of one of perspective the from activity designed well a be may What investigations. scientific report and interpret conduct, design, to abilities own their developing and practising are students science, doing In building. knowledge scientific in evidence of status and role the understanding with and inquiry scientific of tactics) and (strategies sub-processes and processes the of understanding and knowledge acquiring with is concern major the science, about learning on focused activities In on. so and clarity interest, motivation, of reasons for activities hands-on via learning this approach to chooses and understanding, and knowledge particular reach will students that mind in it has often teacher the science, learning on focused activities In time. the of some for least at them, for separately plan to and them) among interactions the course, of (and, education science of elements three these among distinctions the of conscious be to learning good of productive more be would It sense. meaningful any in science, doing in them engage it does Nor science. about learning their to or science of learning their to little contributes laboratory the in on goes what students, many For productive.1 un- largely is practised, currently as least at work, laboratory that suggests evidence research anything, If learning. about bringing in effectiveness its to attesting evidence research empirical of basis the on than rather feelings', professional 'strong of grounds the on made been often has work practical extensive for case the that however, admitted, be to has It learning'. science of heart the at is experience hands-on that is educators science among ideology predominant 'the says, 179) (1989: Nersessian as Indeed, learning. of form effective and enjoyable an as work practical of virtues the extolled have educators science 960s, 1 the of revolution' 'curriculum the since Ever

work practical through understanding personal developing and Exploring

•..12

144 • Teaching and learning science

between science and science education, and serve to weaken the pedagogical power of hands-on activities (Hodson 1993c). The importance of the distinctions among learning science, learning about science and doing science is evident in the responses of teachers when practicals 'go wrong'. Nott and Smith (1995) suggest that there are three com-

mon responses: 'talking your way out of it', 'rigging it' and 'conjuring it'. The first involves the teacher encouraging the students to engage in critical evaluation of the experiment in order to 'assign blame' — faulty apparatus, inadequate bench skills, errors in instructions, 'hard luck' and so on. Rigging is where the teacher uses her or his expertise to manipulate the variables in such a way that 'good results' are obtained. Conjuring involves the fraudul-

ent production of 'good results' by secret manipulation of the apparatus, contamination of the materials or other forms of sleight of hand. Clearly, conjuring is counter-normative behaviour from the perspective of scientific inquiry. Indeed, it is widely deplored by the scientific community. However,

it appears to be widespread in science teaching. Those who engage in it justify their actions in terms of the learning benefits that accrue to students: it improves understanding, avoids confusion, gets the point across, aids motivation and so on. It is also justified by the need to get through an overcrowded syllabus, conform to the demands of the departmental workscheme and meet the demands of examinations. It does, however, raise some inter-

esting and important questions concerning the nature of evidence and the role of inquiry. Conjuring is most necessary when practical work is concerned with learning science, when particular outcomes are essential to good understanding. Rigging can be seen as deployment of craft knowledge and tacit understanding to ensure good technique. In that sense, tweaking, as a less pejorative term than 'rigging', may be seen as an integral part of learning about science, from both the teacher's and the students' perspectives. Indeed, students need to learn how to do it for themselves; it is part of scientific connoisseurship. 'Talking your way out of it' may be appropriate to the doing science phase, when things going wrong is to be expected and is a key part of the learning experience. Perhaps 'talking your way through it' and learning how to do so, and how to replan or reorient the inquiry, is a more apt expression (see Nott and Wellington 1996). Of course, questions of control also relate to motivation. Often, teachers allow young children to engage in fairly unstructured personal investigations, while requiring older students to carry out practical exercises, according

to a set of explicit directions, at the very time in their lives when they are struggling to establish their individuality. Little wonder that their interest and enthusiasm decline. What students of all ages appear to value is cognitive challenge, though work must not be so difficult that it cannot be understood and (relatively) easily carried out, doing a 'proper experiment' (one that has a clear purpose and one that 'works') and having a sufficient measure of personal control and independence (see Chapter 6). To put this in Vygotskian terms, laboratory tasks need to be located in the student's zone of proximal

noise. much too learning, to barriers unnecessary many too has practised, presently as work, practical short, In partners. their with well reasonably along get they that ensure time the all and language) impersonal and obscure curiously a in (often experiment the of account an write results, those interpret obtained', been have that results and obtained results between difference the recognize data, the collect apparatus, the handle directions, experimental the follow and comprehend read, teacher), the from assistance minimum only (with perspective theoretical relevant the assemble about), consulted been have they which of (neither procedure experimental the and problem the of nature the understand to have they where position the into put are students Frequently, noise. of reduction the is scaffolding of form One crucial. is scaffolding teacher that here is It knowledge. procedural and knowledge conceptual both of terms in learning, are they what and doing are they what between connection the see to fail many something'), of sense the (in active are they where place a as laboratory the perceive students although So, on. so and force of lines magnetic for evidence as magnet a over placed card a on filings iron of behaviour the matter, of theory particulate a for ence evid- as solution permanganate potassium of dilution progressive the during changes colour molecules, of motion random the for evidence as motion Brownian effects: observable the from out tease to difficult very are seek we concepts abstract underlying the where occasions many are there Moreover, learning. the of core conceptual the with provides it time contact of amount the iii fleeting often is it time, of lot a occupies it that sense the in lengthy is work laboratory While goal. learning real the constitutes that abstractions these with familiarity is it curricula, contemporary most In like). the and chromosomes fields, magnetic bonds, chemical (electrons, concepts abstract of terms in behaviour observed of explanations provide to and findings their interpret and discuss to required are they gerbils), and geraniums filings, iron and magnets sulphur, and (magnesium materials real handling time of deal great a spend classes laboratory in students Although development. and acquisition concept promoting than rather hindering thereby issues, conceptual important the from learner the distract to serves and work, practical conventional much of problems the to substantially contributes experiences laboratory of concreteness very the that argued be could It

science Learning below. little a elaborated is learner, the to apparent is it whether and control, that of nature The science. doing or science about learning science, learning on focuses activity the whether to related closely is control for need the above, given reasons the for However, learner. to teacher from control hand-over a for opportunities more many provide to and development of

145 •

work practical through developing and Exploring

146 • Teaching and learning science

In many cases, experiments can be made simpler by cutting out some of the less crucial steps and by using simpler apparatus and simpler techniques.

There is much to be said for pre-assembly of apparatus. Many students struggle to set up complex apparatus, and feel that they have done enough before the conceptually significant part of the activity has got under way. A similar case can be made for the pre-weighing and pre-dispensing of materials, and for the recalibration of apparatus, to reduce the number of chunks of information that have to be processed or the number of measurements

that have to be made (Johnstone and Wham 1982). An extension of this idea is, of course, the use of programmable calculators and computers to convert raw data into final results, thereby reducing what we might call mathematical noise. Even more powerful in this respect is the use of computers for data capture, processing and presentation, and for monitoring and controlling experiments, thereby enabling more complex and lengthy experiments to be undertaken. Laboratory work is often seen by teachers as a means of obtaining factual

information and data from which conclusions will later be drawn. It has usually been assumed that these data are 'pure' and unaffected by students' existing ideas and, therefore, students have not usually been involved in the designing and planning of experimental investigations. More often than not, the conceptual framework is provided by the teacher, leaving little room for the construction of personal meaning. Problem identification, hypothesis formation, experimental design, methods for manipulating and interpreting

observational data are all under teacher control and, as Zilbersztain and Gilbert (1981) state, 'interaction with the teacher is an occasion for the presentation of the teacher's knowledge' (emphasis added). Because students often have a different framework of understanding, failure to engage them in the thinking that precedes an experimental investigation renders much of the ensuing laboratory work pedagogically useless. One of the roles of laboratory work is to provide the direct experiences that give real concrete meaning to abstract conceptualizations. Often, however, instruction stops when students can recall and use an idea correctly in a single context — the one in which it was presented to them. The proper

understanding that constitutes enculturation into science involves much more: it involves using and attempting to use the particular model or theory

in a range of different contexts in order to ascertain its limitations and inadequacies, as well as its capacity for explanation and prediction. 'Notexamples' are just as important as examples in facilitating thorough understanding of a concept or theory (Fensham 1998). The goal of these activities is to find out in what circumstances a concept or theory can and should be used, in what circumstances its use is inappropriate and in what circumstances an alternative model or theory must be sought, or the current theory suitably adapted. Hands-on work generates essential data on which to base such judgements. However, it is through talk among students and between students and the teacher that conceptual understanding is fully explored and developed. As Driver (1983: 49) reminds us, 'Activity by itself is not

organisms and objects handle to hand, first at things these see to need dents Stu- prism. a through passes it as bending light and flame white brilliant a with burning magnesium repulsion, and attraction magnetic of forces about read to enough isn't It addresses. science that events and phenomena the of experience direct have to students for important is it First, crucial. are ences experi- early these which in senses two are There events'. of 'recollections or 'episodes' calls (1991) White what of background rich a acquire to students for important is it however, place, take can activities of kinds these Before world. real the on understanding new their out test to students for opportunities provide to used be can kinds ous vari- of experiences field and work laboratory Subsequently, curriculum. the in specified understanding conceptual of kind the towards students assist to used be can experiences learning controlled more these Often, possibilities. exciting more even offer reality virtual of technology the and video active Inter- development. concept about bringing at work bench conventional to superior be often may activities computer-based safely, and reliably quickly, understanding that to relevant consider they investigations conduct to and understanding theoretical their explore to students enable they Because 1998). Huisman and (Kirschner work laboratory conventional in possible is than ing understand- building of way a as ideas manipulating time more considerably spend to learners enable databases and simulations computer predictions, and speculations of appropriateness the on feedback instant providing and experiences, concrete of noise the eliminating By things. real with ments expen- of feature a much so are that boredom and difficulties distractions, the without concepts central the on concentrate to learners enables that ation situ- experimental an create generally and conditions idealized adopt tures, fea- certain exclude or include complexity, of level the increase or decrease can One reality. of complexities the to goals learning the fit to having of situation usual more the of instead goals, teaching/learning the to precisely experience learning the tailor to teacher the enables experiments, real to opposed as simulations, computer of use the Moreover, way. other any in out carry to dangerous too or consuming time too expensive, too difficult, too are that experiments many are There activities. computer-based with possible is outcomes of control more Even science'. 'challenge-based calls (1989) Tunnicliffe strategies of collection the and 4) Chapter (see (1988) al. et Gunstone by developed tasks predict—observe—explain the as such work, laboratory to approaches alternative for said be to much is There work. hands-on than productive more be often can others, with sion discus- through especially theories, and discoveries else's someone critiquing oneself; for 'discover' to necessary always isn't It justification. rational their testing and ideas exploring of ways all are on so and examples counter ing giv- metaphors, and analogies constructing arguing, Explaining, hands-on. as well as 'minds-on' become tasks laboratory the talk, Through formance. per- actual after and during before, occurring talk through work practical of made is Sense matters.' that it of made is that sense the is It enough. 147 •

work practical through developing and Exploring

148 • Teaching and learning science

for themselves and to experience phenomena directly, in order to build up a stock of personal experience. Because many science concepts depend on experiences not encountered in ordinary day-to-day life, students need lots of opportunities for 'messing about'. Furthermore, concepts for which students have only one contextual referent are less likely to be remembered

or to be used than those for which they have a rich and varied array of referents and associations. This is the aspect of practical work that Woolnough and AIlsop (1985) describe as 'getting a feel for phenomena'. Second, students

need direct experience of laboratory apparatus (they need to read meters, use microscopes and connect circuits, for example) in order to develop both the capacity and the confidence to use equipment appropriately and skilfully. This is not an argument for an intensive bench skills training programme. Rather, it is a suggestion that, on occasions, the adoption of some kind of familiarization programme may be a necessary precursor to successful scientific inquiry or a productive laboratory exercise. Elsewhere, I have argued that the acquisition of laboratory skills has little, if any, value in itself (Hodson 1990). Rather, these skills are a means to an

end being further learning. To attempt to justify practical work in school in terms of skill development is to be guilty of putting the cart end — that

before the horse. It is not that practical work is necessary in order to provide students with particular laboratory skills; rather, it is that particular skills are necessary if students are to engage successfully in practical work. Two points follow: we should teach only those skills that are of value in the pursuit of other learning and, when such is the case, we should ensure that those skills are developed to a satisfactory level of competence. My own view is that when successful engagement in an experiment requires a skill that students will not need again, or levels of competence that they cannot quickly attain, alternative procedures should be found, such as pre-assembly of apparatus, teacher demonstration or computer simulation.

Learning about science and doing science Allowing students to undertake their own investigations contributes substantially to their understanding of the nature of science, provided that a sufficient range of scientific inquiries is considered. As argued previously, not all inquiries are experimental; it is important that students are provided with opportunities to undertake correlational studies and to engage in technological problem-solving. Both provide substantial scope for exploring, challenging and extending both conceptual and procedural knowledge. It should

also be recognized that many worthwhile scientific inquiries can be conducted outdoors — in the school grounds, field centres, forests, beaches and mountains — and in museums, zoos and botanic gardens. These venues also provide some invaluable opportunities for students to work with scientists and

to engage in worthwhile community work and politicized environmental action (Eisenhart et a!. 1996; Helms 1998).

and criticism support, on-the-job provide can who practitioner perienced ex- and skilled a alongside science, doing by is science do to learn to way effective most the that asserts model apprenticeship by enculturation The

autonomy to transition the and Modelling everyone. to accessible made and demythologized be can science experiences such Through fail. sometimes and work sometimes that things trying and guessing thinking, people about is science that learn they Third, scientist. creative the of skills planning strategic and thinking the of some acquire they Second, concepts. those manipulate to opportunity and time more have they because them, for accounting in used be can that concepts the and investigation under phenomena the about more much learn students First, experiences. such in embedded goals learning three least at are There science. real like more is This all. at not some well, less some well, work will which of some procedures, different with up come to students of groups different enable simulations computer proceeding; of way only the as presented are class in experiments often, Too them. including it, do can Anyone laboratories. sophisticated in experts white-coated by out carried business difficult and specialized a not is experiments designing that learn they importantly, More thoughtfully. more and thoroughly more investigate to led are and mistakes their from learn students way, this In safely. and quickly eliminated, or modified, and students the by discovered be can problems any and ahead go can designs poor tion, simula- computer a With instructions. their follow merely students and lesson, the of advance in usually experiments, the all design to tend teachers Consequently, strategies. experimental hazardous potentially or inefficient ate, inappropri- adopting students of risk the run or cost the meet time, the vide pro- to unwilling are teachers because design experimental and generation hypothesis in engage to opportunities have not do students lessons, based laboratory- most In practice. scientific of nature the of understanding an vide pro- that science of aspects creative more the in engage to students enabling for technique powerful particularly a is simulations computer of use The experiments. thought and activities computer-based debating, and playing role reconstructions, dramatic and simulations studies, case historical of use the them, among — experiences learning active other of range wide a utilize we that requires understanding of level that Achieving appraised. and ported re- negotiated, is research scientific which in ways the of understanding an includes it experimentation; and observation of nature the of awareness an than more involves practice' scientific for feel a 'getting However, knowledge. scientific of growth the and understanding personal their of ment develop- the between parallels meaningful draw to able are they course, the in earlier conducted activities laboratory reinterpret and reconsider students when example, For progress. learning personal group's, the and own, their on reflect to students encouraging from gained be to much also is There 149 •

work practical through developing and Exploring

150 • Teaching and learning science

advice, and is able to model the processes involved and invite criticism from the learner. As Ravetz (1971: 177) has commented, learning to do science occurs 'almost entirely within the interpersonal channel, requiring personal contact and a measure of personal sympathy between the parties. What is transmitted will be partly explicit, but partly tacit; principle, precept, and example are all mixed together.' Clear and skilful demonstration of expert practice (modelling) and the provision of opportunities for critical questioning, interspersed with opportunities for guided participation by the 'novice', provided they are informed by critical feedback from the 'expert', comprise the stock-in-trade of the apprenticeship approach to the teaching and learning of complex tasks in real life practical situations (Lave and Wenger 1991). For the more formal situation of school-based learning, the following threephase approach may be relatively easily implemented.

• modelling, where the teacher exhibits the desired behaviour; • guided practice, where students perform with help from the teacher; • application, where students perform independently of the teacher. Teacher modelling is, of course, predicated on the assumption that observation of skilled performers facilitates learning. Thus, teacher modelling of authentic inquiry (both laboratory/fieldwork-based and literature/mediabased) can play a crucial role in enculturation. First, it demonstrates a commitment to the value of inquiry as a means of learning: the teacher models the learning process by acting as a more expert learner. Second, it shows students how scientists plan, conduct, interpret and report scientific inquiries: the teacher models scientific investigation by acting as a more expert scientist.

When teachers model scientific inquiry it is important to choose an authentic question — that is, one for which they don't already know the answer. Too often, laboratory work in schools creates the impression that scientists spend their time confirming knowledge they already possess. Too

often, also, it creates the impression that science is unrelated to everyday life. Hence, it is important, especially with young children, to investigate something in the immediate environment — something real! Moreover, in the early stages, especially in primary schools, it is important to ensure that the modelled investigations involve as many as possible of the individual sub-

processes in which children are expected to develop proficiency, and that they might reasonably be expected to employ in their own investigations. Predicting, observing, measuring, identifying and manipulating variables, recognizing trends in data, using suitable scientific concepts to hypothesize and model, and describing, recording and reporting in appropriate scientific language can all be modelled by the teacher, with attention focused on their essential features. It is important, too, to explore the notion of a 'fair test' and to discuss the importance of both standardization of technique and accuracy of measurement in ensuring reproducibility of data. At all levels, attention should be directed towards the need to record procedures and data fully, clearly, carefully and accurately, using lists, charts, graphs and so on as

science doing why reason the also is It science. doing and science about ing learn- science, learning of interrelatedness the understanding and recognizing for stimulus the with students provides that science) (doing investigation scientific of personalization and idiosyncrasy very the is it Paradoxically, science. about learning of aspect major a — investigation ific scient- of nature reflexive and idiosyncratic the into insight students give to help teacher, the with them discuss to requirement the and these, like tions Reflec- strategy?' my replan or goals, my rethink to need I 'Do next?', do I should 'What learned?', I have 'What investigation: their of progress the on reflect can students which in logbook investigator's an of use the for said be to much is There successfully. it do to capacity their and science doing constitutes what of understanding their both increase students critic, skilled and trusted a alongside investigations, scientific holistic in engaging By 49). 1992: (Brusic decisions' bad or planning inadequate from arises that agony the and successes of excitement 'the both experience they consequence, a As others. to communication and evaluation final to identification problem initial from process, whole the for responsible are they stage, this By way. own their in them approaching and problems, and topics own their choosing autonomously: proceed to able be will students Eventually, unaided. achieve not could they performance of level a achieve to teacher, the of assistance the with and, reflection and practice of cycle a through learn to students for opportunities provide cises exer- Investigative teacher. the of independently conducted investigations holistic simple (b) and critic, and consultant facilitator, resource, learning as acts teacher the which during exercises, investigative (a) of programme sequenced carefully a through work should students investigations, elled mod- the alongside Consequently, understanding. new building and lems prob- novel solving for — ways creative in knowledge use to and learned have they what beyond go to eventually, students, enable must formance per- assisted as learning words, other In inquiries. own their of reporting and executing planning, the for and learning own their for sponsibility recourse, of independence, intellectual achieve To must take students learning. cooperative for climate suitable a building in assists and other, each help to students encourages it investigations), own students' to ideas contribute course, of (and, ideas students' accept teachers When upon. acted them of some and sought, be should advice and gestions sug- Students' insurmountable. prove that progress to barriers and fruitless prove that inquiry of lines encountered, problems of discussion frank a ing includ- progressing, is inquiry the way the about dialogue continuing is ship apprentice- of notion the to Crucial completion. on and progresses it as both activity, the on reflection intra-group through and discussion, and criticism inter-group via and teacher the by provided feedback evaluative through experience, and practice observation, by 10) (Chapter inquiry of phases five the of each in expert more become will students that anticipated is It students. the with discussed be course, of should, reporting and recording good for Criteria appropriate. 151 •

work practical through developing and Exploring

152 • Teaching and learning science

cannot, in itself, meet all the goals of science education. In any scientific inquiry, students accomplish three kinds of learning. First is enhanced conceptual understanding of whatever is being studied or investigated. Second is enhanced procedural knowledge: learning more about experiments and correlational studies, and acquiring a more sophisticated understanding of observation, experiment and theory. Third is enhanced investigative expertise, which may eventually develop into scientific connoisseurship. Providing opportunities for students to report and debate their findings, and supporting them in reflecting critically on personal progress made during the inquiry, are key elements in achieving this integrative understanding. However, because of the idiosyncratic nature of scientific investigation, and the highly specialized but necessarily limited range of conceptual issues involved in any particular inquiry, doing science is insufficient in itself to bring about the breadth of conceptual development that a curriculum seeks. One cannot learn sufficient science by restricting activities to doing science.2 It takes too long and is too uncertain. Moreover, not all topics lend themselves to a doing science approach. Nor can one learn enough about science by restricting activities to doing science. Learning about science involves more than an awareness of the nature of observation and experimentation:

it includes an understanding of the ways in which scientific research is prioritized, conducted, reported and appraised; it includes some appreciation of the history, philosophy and sociology of science and scientific practice. In short, students need to appreciate that scientific practice is a complex, socially constructed activity. Such awareness cannot be achieved solely by conducting personal investigations on matters of interest to oneself.

It is also the case, as argued above, that restricting the curriculum to learning science and learning about science will guarantee that most students are unable to do science for themselves. Though necessary, conceptual knowledge and knowledge about procedures that scientists can adopt, and may have adopted in particular circumstances in the past, are insufficient in themselves to enable a student to engage successfully in scientific inquiry. That ability is only developed through hands-on experience of doing science

in a critical and supportive learning environment. Moreover, conducting whole investigations and engaging in practical problem-solving in real contexts are valuable because the tension that arises when individuals confront obstacles that prevent them from achieving desired goals is a powerful incentive, forcing them to knowledge that might otherwise remain inert (Prawat 1993). Through such activity, procedural and propositional knowledge become fused into 'strategic knowledge' — knowledge that can be used in real contexts. It has long been a legitimate criticism of school science education that, although students may learn 'textbook knowledge' well, they are often unable to deploy it appropriately and successfully in real contexts.

it! answered have I Finally, science? doing by learnt be courses science school in learn to need students that all 'Can question the posed I 10, Chapter In 2 science.

in learning active reconceptualize to used are work, laboratory of kinds different between and work, laboratory and methods) learning (active work practical between distinctions the 993c), 1 (Hodson matters these of consideration detailed more a In 1988). (Hodson experimental is work laboratory all not that and laboratory, a in conducted is work practical all not that acknowledge to failure the of sequence con- a as debate curriculum science in arise can that confusion the illustrate to part my on ploy deliberate a also is it However, usage. common reflects this extent, large a To synonyms. as virtually used are 'experiments' and Zealand) New and Australia UK, the in term usual more (the work' 'practical America), North in used commonly expression (the work' 'laboratory terms the section, this Throughout

1

Notes 153 •

work practical through developing and Exploring

•..13 Exploring and developing

personal understanding through language When psycholinguists refer to the heuristic function of language, they are arguing that the very act of using language contributes to learning. Struggling to convert partly formed ideas into articulated speech, or into coherent written language, helps to develop those ideas. Hence, language-based activities can be utilized to explore, develop, extend, enrich and reorganize a student's personal framework of understanding. If learning science is about constructing a complex web of concepts and conceptual relationships into which 'official' scientific knowledge is woven, if knowledge becomes meaningful once it is integrated with what is already known in ways that are personal to the learner and if understanding is extended and developed when learners reflect on the relationships between their existing understanding and new knowledge items in the light of current and previous experience, then language can play a clear and important role. What is at issue here is the shifting of emphasis from language as an instrument of teaching to language as a means of learning and a tool for thinking. This shift of emphasis entails a much more active use of talking, listening, reading and writing activities than has been usual in science teaching, especially at secondary school level. The classic research of Ned Flanders (1970) indicates that, on average, two-thirds of each lesson comprises talk, and two-thirds of this is teacher talk. Thus, a 45-minute lesson provides for ten minutes of student talk and, in a classroom of 30 children, each student has about 20 seconds for an activity described above as a key element in building a rich and robust personal framework of understanding. Clearly, we need a shift of emphasis. It is also the case that, in question—answer sessions, sufficient time is rarely allowed for students to assemble a response before the teacher rephrases the question, asks a different question or asks a different student. More significantly, in the context of the current discussion, no time is allowed for students to elaborate their answers. Another paradox is that as the cognitive demand of the matter under consideration increases, teacher questions

be to difference major A product. considered and detailed more a ensure that editing of forms other and elimination, and detection error ideas, key of reconsideration for opportunities more are there speech, than period time longer a over produced is material written because Further, purposes. such for used being increasingly are language spoken containing material video and audiotapes though function, archival an has so and permanence more has text Written diverted. so be can readers although herrings, red of pursuit in argument an from diverted be cannot author absent an hand, other the On clarification. for ask or information further seek reader the can nor tion; intona- or gesture by supported be cannot meaning present, not is author the Because it. comprehend to effort intellectual greater requiring difficult, and complex more is it often abstract; more is discourse Written trasted. con- be can language written and spoken which in ways several are There

talk and Text feelings. and understanding personal of expression the for scope no leaves that specification rigid a to activities laboratory of reports constructing and notebooks to textbooks from batim ver- material transferring dictation, teacher from or blackboard the from notes copying slavishly time of amounts large spend students poverished: im- similarly are provide teachers that activities writing the of Many ial). mater- the of quality and value the themselves for judge to able are readers (where comprehension evaluative and messages) implidt for lines' the between 'read can and text the of subtleties the of some appreciate can readers (where comprehension inferential of levels higher the to proceed to students for opportunities enough create not do teachers methods, learning based language- with unfamiliarity through second, students; for difficult too often are texts first, consider: to issues two are There level. comprehension literal the calls 1975) Science and Education of (Department Report Bullock the what at pitched activity of bursts short to it restricting often and it, to time class of cent per 10 than more no devoting reading, on value much place not do teachers science school secondary that seems it general, In 1994). Rivard 1994; Muth and (Glynn activities writing and reading use teachers science many which in ways the at levelled be also can criticisms Major responses. other's each on comment to students for opportunities more create also they over, More- it. elaborate to and response a formulate to time more much other each allow groups in working students that noticeable is It students. to ity opportun- same the afford don't but thought, organize to language use to ity opportun- an with teacher the provide sessions question—answer traditional that seems It value. most of be would talk student where situation very the in more doing are teachers and talking less doing are students words, other In know'. don't 'I and 'no' 'yes', of level the to descending quently fre- shorter, get answers student while complex, more and longer become 155 •

language through developing and Exploring

156 • Teaching and learning science

noted in the context of the present discussion is the opportunity written material affords for supporting critical thinking. While spoken language is well suited to the negotiation of collaborative action, written language is more supportive of individual or group-based reflection. A dialogue can be established between the reader's thoughts and the writer's words. Text can be used as a device' for exploring, testing, reinforcing and refining existing knowledge, as well as for developing new understanding. It should also be noted that writers frequently use their own text in this way — thoughts are often clarified and elaborated through writing activities. There is also a very significant difference, says Wells (1993), in the ways experience is represented. Oral language is a more dynamic mode, in which reality is expressed in terms of processes, actions and happenings; written language takes a synoptic perspective, with reality and experience being viewed in terms of objects, definitions and explanations. The former is a language of negotiation and action, the latter is a language of symbolic representations and relationships, which makes it an ideal medium for providing detailed instructions and information. Given these differences, and the fact that spoken language is employed

in situations involving more than one person, while text can be used by individuals working alone, text and talk are likely to be used differently by teachers. Talking is commonly used for negotiating, planning, monitoring and evaluating actions, while pre-prepared text is used for providing detailed information and instructions, and student writing is used for recording data and reporting experiences and results. However, the most valuable and productive learning may occur when talk and text are used to complement and enrich each other.

For it is when participants move back and forth between text and talk, using each mode to contextualize the other, and both modes as tools to make sense of the activity in which they are engaged, that we see the most important form of complementarity between them. And it is here, in this interpenetration of talk, text and action in relation to particular activities, that, I want to suggest, students are best able to undertake what I have called the semiotic apprenticeship into the various ways of knowing. (Wells 1993: 10)

There are three points being argued here. First, students learn science (and learn about science) by talking, reading and writing. Second, talking about text is especially productive. Third, in the same way that students learn to do science by doing science alongside a skilled practitioner, students learn to read, write and talk science by doing so in the company of a more skilled practitioner, who models, guides, criticizes and supports.

linguistic and vocabulary teacher's the up pick may students that danger a also is there However, couched. are argument and reporting scientific which in forms the with familiar become and expressions and words everyday use scientists which in ways specialized the learn to need also Students example. for photosynthesis, — vocabulary purpose-made to relating issue an just not is This process. enculturation the of part crucial a is It properly. it employ to how students show to and language scientific introduce to teachers for important is It understanding. of lack a disguise can use continued its ideas, explore to willingness a facilitate may language familiar of use students' while example, For language. specialized and thinking of ways new duce intro- and ideas alternative or data additional of direction the in students point guidance, provide also teachers that crucial is it However, teacher. the by acknowledged is feelings of strength the and encouraged is views of diversity way, own their in views their express students which in sion, discus- authentic be must it all, Above effectively. and promptly with dealt are hurt or injustice of feelings any that important is It talk. to which in 'space' other each allow and contribute to confident feel students all which in environment supportive and non-threatening trusting, safe, a created have to needs teacher the Second, participate. to interested sufficiently be must students First, appended. be could conditions other of number A

result. will outcome worthwhile a that expectation the have to need Students sub-groups. discussion separate into or members, passive and active into fragment can groups large while views, of breadth sufficient groups are generate not six to three of Groups do Small best. members later). see (but productive counter- be can that asymmetry power a introduces involvement Teacher preferred). are groups (friendship peers' 'consenting between be should Talk development.) proximal of zone the in pitched is it when is, that — skills additional acquire and sources appropriate locate understanding, current their beyond just knowledge seek to have students when occurs discussion valuable much that is view own (My knowledge. current participants' of scope the within but problematic be to needs discussion under topic The

•

•

•

•

discussion. good for essential as regards he conditions four lists (1983) McClelland one. scientific a is discourse of form the that ensure teachers unless mode interaction social informal regular, the into lapse often can discussions Furthermore, planned. be to has it happen, just doesn't talk productive ever, How- understanding'. better a into themselves 'talk may they talk, to time given are students If early. too views formed poorly children's correcting from refrain and talk, to space the children allow to have They knowledge. present and sequence organize, to inclination natural their control to have teachers science claiming, am I as learning of productive as is talking If

listening and Talking 157 •

language through developing and Exploring

158 • Teaching and learning science

patterns and use them 'mechanically' to hide their lack of understanding. A useful tactic is to require at least two very different ways of expressing a viewpoint. As always, it is a matter of striking a balance between too much teacher direction and too little. Barnes (1988) distinguishes two kinds of talk, located at opposite ends of a continuum: exploratory talk, through which students consider and organize

their ideas; and presentational talk, through which they report to others on what they currently understand or have recently learned. Exploratory talk occurs during laboratory activities, in activities devised specifically to encourage talking (such as formulating definitions of key concepts, preparing a tape—slide sequence or shooting a video, devising a set of questions, selecting text and visual aids to illustrate an idea) and in preparing for group presentations. During inquiry-based activities, exploratory talk is also used to create a sense of group cohesion and purpose, and to manage and organize the work (see Chapter 7). It shapes the nature of the inquiry, enables consensus to be reached, establishes the limits of the group's current understanding and identifies those areas in which the teacher's help needs to be sought. Presentational talk can range from simple 'show and tell' activities, in which students describe an object or recount an investigation or event to other students, to elaborate multimedia group presentations to the rest of

the class, other students (both within the school and outside), parents or invited members of the local community. There are two major points to be made. First, learning to speak clearly and concisely in order to convey information, ideas and opinions to others in a comprehensible way is an important aspect of enculturation into science and a key component of education for responsible citizenship. Second, all kinds of productive talking are involved in preparing group presentations, especially if audio-recorders are used to edit, rework and refine presentation. Post-presentation evaluation can be a productive time for reflection and consolidation of learning. By reviewing each presentation from the listener's perspective, teachers and students can co-construct an evaluation checklist of points to keep in mind during the preparation of oral presentations. These kinds of activities are invaluable in providing teachers with insight into the personal frameworks of understanding of individual students. There are many ways in which presentational talk can be made to mimic

the seminars, debates and conferences of the scientific community, thus playing a significant role in teaching students about science and the ways in which scientific knowledge is negotiated by practitioners. The immediacy of such activities can be a major stimulus to thought: feedback is immediate, critical questions are asked, leads and ideas from others can be utilized at once as the basis for a change or modification of views. When students have to explain, defend their views and answer questions, they develop a deeper

understanding and are led to explore and develop their personal framework of understanding. When students have to convince others of the intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness of their ideas, they necessarily evaluate, elaborate and synthesize aspects of their understanding, make explicit what

whether of regardless education, science of aspects important most the among is persuasively and clearly views one's express and argument an of quality and nature the evaluate understanding, with listen and read to able being that argued be could it Indeed, writer. and reader both as modes, different these between freely move to ability the includes literacy scientific Critical conventions. structural different of use the and styles writing different of adoption the to lead audience intended and purpose writer's the in changes which in ways the of understanding an necessitates levels evaluative and inferential the at Comprehension on. so and fiction of works material, torical his- and biographical reports, and papers academic newspapers, and zines maga- textbooks, types: text of range broad a with work to opportunity the given be to students for important is it that point second the to respect with is It deployed. be can it when and how and understanding own their into insight gain they third, communication); of forms other about implication, by (and, communication scientific about learn they second, understanding; procedural and conceptual develop and acquire students first, activities: reading from deriving goals learning of categories major three are There

activities Reading views. other various their to relation in ideas own their out sort to students assists so and differences and similarities out points meaning, clarifies ideas, key phasizes em- and out picks attention, focus to helps talk teacher Skilful sensitively. and systematically carefully, terminology new and ideas new introducing of way a is talk Teacher accessible. and humanized exciting, meaningful, more science make can teachers jokes, and anecdotes stories, reminiscences, sonal per- metaphors, graphic analogies, and similes exemplars, everyday using by and language, everyday and language scientific between forwards and backwards shifting By language. everyday familiar more alongside science of language the of aspects formal using and experience, representing of mode distinctive its and science of terminology specialized the to students ducing intro- processes, enculturation the in tool scaffolding powerful a be can tion exposi- Teacher says. (1990) Lemke as science', stalking for occasion an is It modelled. be to science of language the enable does it presentation, teacher of dismissive be to years recent in fashionable been has it Although material. pre-prepared of presentation oral extended an exposition, teacher or ture lec- the is language written and spoken between intermediate mode A hearing. are they what of sense make to students other help to notations con- some find and metaphors, and analogies similes, use perhaps examples, recognized easily some locate to have They textbook. the of phrases jargon the use just can't they language; everyday of use extensive more making sion, expres- of forms alternative find and paraphrase to have They on. so and ness vague- inconsistencies, understanding, in gaps contradictions, discrepancies, identify thinking, own their critically examine implicit, remain might otherwise 159 •

language through developing and Exploring

160 • Teaching and learning science

one sees science education as primarily concerned with preparation for responsible citizenship or with the acquisition and development of investigative skills and theory building capability. Moreover, acquiring the ability to read effectively for further learning is essential to the development of intellectual independence and lays the necessary base for lifelong learning. Because texts in science are often very rich in information, make use of unfamiliar terminology, adopt an impersonal and abstract style, deal with

matters that are remote from the everyday experience of most children and contain many counter-intuitive ideas, they are often more difficult to understand than texts used in other areas of the curriculum. Sutton (1992) makes the point that school science textbooks often give the impression that they are designed for teachers, rather than for students. Ironically, homework tasks are often based on commercially produced texts that are more difficult than the teacher-produced materials used in class — where the teacher's help is available! Presented with a text whose content and knowledge base is unfamiliar and, possibly, lacking in motivational appeal, students may: (a) ignore the text altogether and continue to rely on their existing knowledge; (b) use a 'surface processing' approach to extract key words and phrases; or (c) distort or misrepresent the text to make it compatible with their existing understanding (Roth and Anderson 1988). There are two ways of addressing these problems. One approach is to encourage students to learn and adopt one of the several generic reading strategies, such as SQ4R (Thomas and Robinson 1972) and MURDER (Danserau 1985); the other is to provide many more reading tasks that require students to interrogate the text. By engaging

with the text in more active ways, students not only explore and develop understanding about the matter under consideration, they also develop the skills and supportive attitudes that enable them to use text more successfully in the future. In other words, when students are encouraged to regard text

as a resource to support discussion, argument and the co-construction of understanding, they are more inclined to develop the habits of searching for more subtle levels of meaning in texts and evaluating texts more critically. Expert readers are distinguished from novice readers by the extent to which they use existing knowledge to make sense of the text, monitor their comprehension as they proceed (through self-questioning), deal promptly with any failure to understand, identify key ideas and evaluate their significance as they encounter them, actively search for consistency, coherence and discrepancy, attend to misunderstandings and misconceptions as they become aware of them, reformulate and synthesize knowledge as they read and so on (Pearson et al. 1992). These attributes can be fostered by engaging

students in more authentic, active reading: reading for specific purposes, made clear to the learner in advance, and requiring active engagement with the text. Davies and Greene (1984) urge teachers to replace the often rather vague and unhelpful instructions they give students in connection with reading tasks (e.g. 'read pages 45—55, there will be a test next week') with much more purposeful directed activities related to text (DARTs) that periodically require students to stop, reflect on what they have read so far and attempt

courses. science school primary in literature children's of range wide a utilizing for case strong a is there Thus, style. narrative a in presented are they if ideas new assimilate to easier it find may children young that noted be should it aside, brief a As fiction. of works and movies advertisements, and programmes television include to extended be usefully might activity This labels. product and advertisements cartoons, nals, jour- academic and magazines scientific styles, various of textbooks zines, maga- popular and newspapers from science on writing of samples display and criticize collect, students which in activity an in located be could ence sci- about learning and science learning of aspects significant Many others. of ideas the to critically respond to ability the and effectively, and concisely ideas one's communicate to ability the literacy: scientific critical of opment devel- the in elements crucial two underpins awareness Such types. text ent differ- read to how on advice useful presents and matters these into insights valuable some provides (1991) Mallow purposes. their of pursuit in authors various by employed features structural the identify to asked be might dents stu- argumentation, of techniques and metaphor of use voice, organization, text to relating teaching explicit Following parents. or students other by use for bibliography annotated an assemble or students other for readability text assess racism, and sexism bias, sociopolitical of evidence for appraisal rigorous a to texts subject points, debating of set a or statement' 'position a prepare might They students. other by produced material written criticize and read even or students, other by use for text a on questions of set a formulate to groups in work might students level, sophisticated more a At 1990). Hunt 1986; (Holman Projects SATIS the by produced material example, for see, — requirement first the meeting for ideal is matters, environmental or economic social, with deals and issues-based, or problem-oriented is that Material types. text alternative of use extensive more make and text to attention close require that tasks reading authentic in students engage should teachers possible, wherever and possible, as quickly As frequently. too used if students bore and irritate can they and novelty, their in lies impact their of much DARTs; over-use to not important is It text. the in described thing some- represent to logos or posters designing maps; concept and charts flow diagrams, into text 'translating' text; scrambled reordering text; of extracts lengthy for sub-headings and titles appropriate on deciding definitions; writing arguments; key the paraphrasing highlighting; and underlining by points significant and vocabulary important identifying omitted; been have items which from charts and tables sentences, completing it; follow to likely is what others with discussing and text of section a reading include: examples simplest The reading. purposeful and reflective active, ensuring to key the is that instructions the of nature specific the is it levels, all at but, sophistication conceptual of level any almost at pitched be can DARTs it. of sense make to 161 •

language through developing and Exploring

162 • Teaching and learning science

Writing activities Much of what has been said about the need for active reading can be developed as a case for active writing. Lunzer and Gardner (1979) found that, on average, an 11-year-old science student in a UK school spends about 11 per cent of class time engaged in writing, and a 15-year-old up to about 20 per cent. However, at least half of that time is devoted to copying from the blackboard or from dictated notes, and another sizable chunk is spent filling in blanks in worksheets. Sadly, in many schools, little has changed in the intervening two decades. It is important not to confuse the physical activity involved in this kind of 'closed' writing with the worthwhile cognitive activity that underpins more 'open' writing tasks. Indeed, active writing in the sense being explored here does not have to entail very much physical writing at all. Concept mapping and the use of word burrs (Sutton 1992), false concept maps and 'instances and misconceptions tables' (Osborne 1997), for example, involve virtually no writing, yet they can be particularly powerful in stimulating reflective thinking, especially in group learning situations. Similarly, in 'free writing' and 'free association' activities (Juell 1985), students are able to set aside the usual concerns with spelling, grammar and structure in order to concentrate on brainstorming ideas with other students. The traditional emphasis on grammar, spelling and other technical aspects of writing can be enormously inhibiting, and can divert students from the principal learning goals: acquiring and practising the distinctive forms of scientific discourse; exploring and developing conceptual and procedural knowledge; gaining insight into one's personal framework of understanding and learning how to select and utilize particular aspects of it in particular circumstances. Of course, scientific discourse has its required forms and approved conventions, and it is important for students to know what they are and how to employ them appropriately. However, too early and too rigorous a concern with these matters can be distracting, and even alienating. Students can become so concerned with the 'correct' way of saying something that they don't explore their own thoughts. In addition, without the kinds of reading activities discussed earlier, students can be so intimidated by the supposed authority of the textbook that they are reduced to copying extensive passages almost verbatim. As Flick (1995: 1068) remarks:

'when students research topics in the library, the result is a parody of the intended product through plagiarism and paraphrase.' The Writing Across the Curriculum team (Martin 1976) identified three main kinds of writing used in schools: transactional, expressive and poetic. In transactional writing, the writer has to be logical and truthful, and is required to adopt certain codes and conventions. It is the language for presenting facts and for reporting, arguing and theorizing. Whereas transactional writing is generally impersonal, expressive writing assumes that the writer

and her or his experiences and feelings are of interest to the reader. This kind of writing may have very little or no formal structure: it just follows

science, humanize to students encourage can we means, such By riculum. cur- science the in place prominent more much a afforded be should telling story- that follows It story. a also is brings, it opportunities and insight the and kind, any of development Personal ways. new in people other with and world the with interact and see to us enabling understanding, of framework personal a modifies or enriches reinforces, understanding new learning, ence sci- In story. a is discovery scientific Thus, world. physical the in events and phenomena objects, investigating systematically people of means by lated accumu- is knowledge science, In narratives. as seen be could learning ence sci- and science both moreover, And, communication. substantial at attempts first very their from language children's of part are Narratives conclusion. or resolution a seeking and perspective narrator's a taking events, of ing order- sequential action, human on emphasis including structures, narrative applying by language through experience our understand and municate we that suggests (1990) Bruner grow com- to our acquire in and ability page.' notebook a on line a crossing as it identifying by concrete made is crossing border of task 'The says, 29) (1996: Aikenhead As science. learning of aspects transcultural the on attention focus to help may — page facing the on ideas science' of 'subculture and page one on understanding) commonsense (or ideas' 'my with — notebook' 'dichotomized a maintaining of idea 1997) (1996, Aikenhead's knowledge. scientific new of sense personal make they which by process the is This on. so and shows, TV and movies books, to reference make analogy, and metaphor employ experiences, personal other incorporate frequently They matters. scientific strictly to themselves confine not do students journals, their in writing When effective. particularly are teacher, and students between dialogue a establish that journals and journals team especially journals, and logs Learning paper'. on 'thinking to — ideas new with terms to coming and out trying of process the to essential be may it Thus, associations. and relationships new with around play to and feelings, and memories ideas, other of web complex a within and against theory or idea new a explore to learners enables writing Expressive groups. minority ethnic some and girls for access restrict that barriers the of some reducing in value have also may It ideas. about speculating and questions asking doubts, expressing for writing transactional than vehicle better much a be may writing Expressive science. in writing poetic and expressive of use extensive more much for case a create points these All development. and exploration their permits that writing of style a use to sense make would it relationships, sociocultural of network student's each of complexity the reflect and idiosyncratic highly are understanding of frameworks personal If them. express to students for opportunities create to sense make would it emotions, and feelings attitudes, students' by impacted is learning science If tasks. writing student sonalize per- to sense make would it personalized, be to is learning science If school. secondary in especially science, in discouraged often is that writing of style a is It logbook. or diary a in as feelings, and thoughts writer's the of flow and ebb the 163 •

language through developing and Exploring

164 • Teaching and learning science

express their own views, speculate, hypothesize and predict, and look for connections to other things that they know and have experienced, using a combination of familiar and authentic scientific language (Sutton 1996). Poetic writing may have a useful role in this context, too, as well as art work, music, drama and role playing. Narrative may be a particularly effective means

of assisting border crossing by highlighting differences in worldview and other culturally determined knowledge, experience and values (Bajracharya and Brouwer 1997). This is not to suggest that transactional writing has no place in science education. Quite the contrary: transactional writing promotes lucid and orderly handling of information and ideas; it permits ideas to be manipulated,

juxtaposed, compared and contrasted. Further, students learn how to read this style of written material more critically by writing it themselves. In the form of short expository exercises — note making, summarizing, explaining,

analysing, paraphrasing, comparing and contrasting, formulating questions and so on — transactional writing is an excellent way of focusing attention on discrete bits of knowledge; in the form of extended essays, it is a valuable way of synthesizing ideas. In short, all three styles of writing are important, for different purposes. What students need to know, and this constitutes a crucial part of enculturation, is when a particular style is appropriate.

Another major problem is that almost all writing in school science is produced for the same audience and for the same purpose: the audience is the teacher and the purpose is assessment. Invariably, it entails the writer telling the teacher what she or he already knows. Moreover, the student knows that the teacher already possesses this knowledge, and is aware that the only purpose of the exercise is to enable the teacher to assign a mark or grade. In other words, it is not genuine or authentic communication. Rather, it is part of the game of school: the game of 'getting the right answer'. By varying the audience, and by insisting that writing fulfils a genuinely communicative purpose, teachers can ensure that students are better motivated, clearer about expectations and enabled to practise and develop a wider range of writing skills.

The writing equivalent of DARTs include such things as rewriting and paraphrasing exercises, completing an unfinished text, writing text from diagrams, pictures and tables of data. Each of these activities can have a significant role in enhancing conceptual understanding. However, as with reading activities, it is important to begin as early as possible with authentic authoring tasks, in which students write for a real audience, with a real purpose in mind and in a style that suits both audience and purpose. Suitable audiences include: other students; parents or family members; an Uncle George figure, who invariably 'gets the wrong end of the stick' and has to be 'put right' (as in the Nuffield schemes); some section of the public; themselves. The purpose may be to inform, explain, persuade, argue a point of view, express emotions and feelings or encourage action. Authentic writing tasks may take the form of a technical report, diary entry, field trip notes, TV or film script, fictional story, letter, action or protest letter, brochure or

engaging of possibility the up opens also technology Computer editing. and redrafting revising, about perceptions students' changing radically and lessly, pain- and quickly made be to changes extensive even enabling value, able inestim- such of is processor word the where is course, of This, way. some in situation the changes move writing Every purpose. underlying the or plan the of reconsideration a even or ideas new ideas, expressing of ways new to lead may that evaluation and criticism to subject are they paper, to put are words as soon as that seems it plan, the detailed however activity: dictable unpre- and untidy an is It process. interactive and dynamic a is writing that learn also they supporter; and facilitator critic, guide, as acting teacher) (the practitioner skilled a alongside it, doing by it do to learn students do only Not inquiry. scientific authentic like is writing authentic ways, many In audiences. and purposes of variety a for written preferably text, of examples bad and good both criticize and read to opportunities include should instruction tinuing con- this of Part support. and criticism exemplification, guidance, by panied accom- is practice that unless practice with improve necessarily not does Writing made. be not will progress significant feedback, critical regular without made; be carmot choices effective matters, such of knowledge background ing develop- and adequate an Without purposes. particular for deployed be can they which in ways the and writing of techniques the concerning struction in- continuing crucially, and, teacher the from support and guidance need also students course, Of write. to how and write to what about others, with collaboration in decisions, own their make and control have students when accrue major benefits learning the whereas control, teacher strict under are activities) most (like tasks writing often, Too learning and teaching mode. the from distinct as writing, of mode the as to refer (1987) Scardamalia and Bereiter what for opportunities creates it words, other In making. decision and solving problem- ideas, of exploration the in them involves It perspectives. alternative seek and challenge question, to constantly students encourages writing ive cooperat- Thus, stage. evaluation the during forefront the at are course, of and, stage production the throughout review constant in are matters These on. so and argument of consistency and coherence to attend expression, of clarity ensure audience, anticipated the for form appropriate in them express them, among relationships establish ideas, their organize standing, under- and knowledge additional seek purpose, the to relevant is what select know, already they what assess to have students planning, In evaluating. and producing planning, process: authoring the of stages all at experiences learning important are there Hence, product. coherent a prepare can they before know to need they what and know already they what exploring also are they audience, their with communicate to best how learning students are only Not meaning. of co-construction the for opportunities rich provides setting, learning group a in located when especially authoring, Authentic script. role-play or drama poetry, instructions, and guidelines article, newspaper poster, newsletter, 165 •

language through developing and Exploring

166 • Teaching and learning science in cooperative writing ventures with students in other schools, possibly in other countries, perhaps in the form of a regular exchange of newsletters on scientific matters. The Science Across the World project (British Council 1997) provides just such an opportunity and one, moreover, that is focused on the kinds of issues and politicized approach discussed in Chapters 1 and 2.

Reading, writing, talking and doing science While it has been useful for the purposes of the foregoing discussion to look separately at activities concerned with talking, listening, reading and writing, it is clear that they are mutually interactive. Thus, learning is enhanced

when students talk and write about what they read, talk about what they write and read what their peers write. Significant learning also occurs at the intersection of language-based activities and hands-on inquiry, when students talk and write about their laboratory-based and fieldwork investigations. It is through this combination of talking, reading, writing and doing science, and their interaction, that students are stimulated to reflect on these processes, on their learning and its development and on the nature of science itself. Enculturation into science also involves an adjustment to one's self-image

to incorporate 'self as scientist'. This particularly difficult aspect of border crossing can be promoted through language-based learning experiences. It seems, for example, that students often read text as story, subconsciously regarding the author as the scientist behind the storyline (Abt-Perkins and Pagnucci 1993). With appropriate encouragement, students can begin to see themselves in that role, identifying personally with the actions and struggles of scientists and the contexts in which they work. Reinforcement comes, of course, through writing personal accounts of scientific investigations, both real and imagined. As argued earlier, it is personal stories rather than objective, third person accounts that provide the best opportunities for students to explore, develop and consolidate their new understanding, make sense of new experiences, reflect on their learning progress and explore their sense of belonging within the scientific community. 'It helps us to find out what we are currently thinking when we tell a new story, what we used to think

when we tell an old one, and what we think of what we think when we hear what we ourselves have to say' (Schank 1990: 146). Enculturation into science also involves learning to 'read and write' in other modes of symbolic representation. Effective use of equations, diagrams, charts and graphs is the most immediately relevant, and little more needs to be said about them, beyond expressing the well established view that students need extensive opportunities to work with and construct them. It is also increasingly important for students to be literate with respect to video technology and the techniques of advertisers. They might learn much about their personal framework of understanding by designing a logo, drawing a picture, assembling a collage, writing an advertising jingle or shooting

science. of subculture the into crossing border smoother facilitates that it, with associated attitudes the and reflection, of kind this is It science. and ing understand- personal learning, on reflection group-based and individual ing support- and encouraging for resource valuable a provide also They means. other by possible is than understanding of frameworks personal students' into insight deeper much with teachers provide can and schemes assessment portfolio-based for basis the form can They investigations. atory/fieldwork labor- and inquiries language-based/media-based both support to used be can to well particularly are Jackdaws and learning inquiry-oriented suited encouraged. be also can reflection critical of measure substantial a selections, particular made students why for rationale audiotaped or written a for requirement a With creativity. and idiosyncracy personalization, encourages that form a within skills particular of practising the ensuring thereby students, to making decision the of most leaving while items, certain of inclusion the require can teachers groups, in or alone Jackdaws, own their compile students When on. so and programs computer maps, data, biographical photographs, cuttings, newspaper tracts, exmay events or persons issues, topics, particular on ials textbook include maternon-print print and of collections These package. multimedia of styles other and teacher-produced or available commercially using by achieved be can knowledge, representing of ways alternative these of ence experi- varied more a and activities, writing and reading of range wide A project. may they messages implicit whatever evaluate and detect to confidence and skill the acquire and weaknesses and strengths their to sensitive are knowledge, representing of ways different these between freely move to learn students that is crucial is What video. short a 167 •

language through developing and Exploring

•..14 Making it work: the role

of the teacher

It was argued in Chapter 12 that for activities concerned with learning science (acquiring and developing conceptual understanding), teachers may need to retain some degree of control over the statement of the problem and

the evaluation and interpretation of the results, while for activities concerned with learning about science, it is important for students to have some control over planning and strategy, and to engage in discussion about how

the data that can be collected and the interpretations that can be made depend on experimental design. For activities designed to give students experience of doing science, it is important for control of most aspects of the

inquiry to be ceded to the students. It was argued in Chapter 6 that the more control students exercise, the greater the sense of ownership and, therefore, the greater the motivational power of the activity is likely to be. There is also evidence that management problems are decreased and student learning is enhanced when students assume greater levels of control (Roth and Roychoudhury 1993). The amount of student control that is desirable on any particular occasion is, of course, a matter of professional judgement. Teacher control and decision-making functions, in part, as scaffolding that enables the activity to be brought within each student's zone of proximal development. Schibeci (1987) describes a style of investigation in which responsibility is shared between teacher and students. Teacher demonstration raises a problem or issue, which is explored via teacher-led question—answer sessions and small group discussion. Each student group generates a hypothesis and then collaborates with the teacher in designing an experiment to test it. After conducting the experiment, the students draw whatever conclusions they can, and formulate a tentative explanation. Each group then presents its findings for scrutiny and criticism. Finally, the teacher provides a critical overview and summarizes the main findings. Jones and Kirk (1990) envisage teacher scaffolding (though they don't use that particular expression) operating within a five stage framework.

both can investigations student-led and modelling Teacher control. room class- of definitions narrow quite in rooted are competence of feelings some, For others. for threatening and teachers some for liberating be can book this in suggested approaches the applicable, not are control and authority of forms traditional because and guaranteed, be cannot outcomes the Because independence. intellectual towards move they as students their to support and guidance learner-sensitive tuned, finely provide to seek and teaching their of aspects all in inquiry good of values and practices characteristics, the exhibit inquiry, rational of models as act teachers Good answer'. 'right the ensuring with cerned con- overly not is It teacher. and students between and students, among relationships respectful and trustful of fostering the and — arguments dents' stu- of critique responsive and argument teacher's the of presentation ful thought- — argument to attention careful in located is teaching effective Thus, learner. the of needs the to 1992) Chang-Wells and (Wells responsive' gently 'contin- and supportive always are they critical, highly be sometimes may comments teacher's good the While said. has speaker every what to paid been has attention careful and serious that clearly very signal that sponses re- make they and other, each to carefully listen students their and they which in dialogue fostering by understand to attempts students' their support teachers Skilful learning. effective and good to central is that interactions these during dialogue of quality the course, of is, It strategy. Vygotskian major a considered be can teachers as act to students for opportunities providing Indeed, roles. usual the of reversal occasional an from benefit both that and other, each from learn teachers and students that assumes which ing, teach- reciprocal of notion the is guidelines these of many in Embedded form. table in strategy their out set to them requiring by variables of manipulation the to approach their in careful and systematic be to students help tables Variables why?' and happen, will think I do 'What know?', I do 'What as such questions ing incorporat- reflection, to aids are sheets response Pupil (1993). Fairbrother and Watson by described tables' 'variables and sheets' response 'pupil the example, for — scaffolding indirect of use the in value be still can there tion, investiga- whole the of control have students when occasions those on Even phases. earlier in developed ideas new using activities writing in engage to or gations investi- further out carry to students for opportunities creating — Applying topic. the develop to investigations the from information using — Consolidating class. the to findings their report students as leader discussion and critic as acting — Reporting questions. their answer to investigations out carry they as students supporting — Exploring questions. asking investigation; an of features important to attention directing interest; generating 169 •

—

•

• • •

Focusing •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

170 • Teaching and learning science

impact severely on this view of class control. When students make their own decisions, ask questions and challenge teachers, and when lesson planning cannot be conducted with precision and certainty of outcome, some teachers

may feel that their authority is being challenged, or even undermined. Developing alternative perceptions of what it means to be control' of student learning is an essential part of effecting a shift of emphasis towards science education as enculturation. Some teachers will feel insecure, or feel that they are failing in their responsibility to the students and their parents, if they are unable to ensure coverage of a large and predetermined body of scientific content. However, the very uncertainty of student-led inquiry and honest teacher modelling conveys some important messages:

• learning is uncertain, challenging and sometimes frustrating, but it is also exciting and rewarding; • teachers are learners too; • learning is a lifelong process.

Students also come to class with views about what constitutes learning and what constitutes teaching. Any changes that teachers wish to make will need to take account of resistance from those who have a vested interest in current methods because they have previously done very well with them. Students who are accustomed to routine tasks that make few intellectual demands may resist the teacher's attempts to introduce more ambiguous, the task downwards', complex and challenging tasks by trying to failing to comply or generally up' (Pintrich et al. 1993). This point is

simply another reminder that if we are to construct good and effective learning experiences we need to take account of all factors that impact on the learner. Whatever the activity, it is the nature and timing of teacher intervention that is crucial: deciding how to attend to each learner in a way

that is appropriate to her or him, taking into account her or his unique personal framework of understanding, including its affective and social com-

ponents; and deciding when to encourage and support, when to direct or instruct and when to involve others. Knowing when, where, how much and what type of guidance, critical feedback and support are needed to facilitate effective learning and the development of good learning behaviours is a matter of professional judgement, deriving from experience and thoughtful reflection on it. Too much guidance can interfere with students' thought processes, act to frustrate problem-solving and lead to premature closure; too little guidance can leave students unable to make satisfactory progress and lead to feelings of frustration, and even alienation. To be effective, teacher guidance and assistance need to be pitched slightly beyond the current level of unaided performance — that is, in the zone of proximal development. Constant dialogue between teachers and students is essential if good intervention decisions are to be made. It is, of course, the nature of the language used by the teacher during these exchanges that establishes the interpretive framework within which students are able to make scientific sense of whatever is being studied. Again, there is an issue of fine

may participants so course, of irrelevant, are others of efforts the situations, individualistic In learning. hinder may and relationships interpersonal poor engenders competition contrast, By learning. enhanced to lead therefore, and, self-esteem enhance belonging, of sense a create relationships, interpersonal positive more foster to likely are so and interactions, encouraging itative, facil- more create will groups cooperative consequence, a As efforts. other's each obstructing from benefit situations competitive in participants while achieve, to efforts other's each facilitating from benefit situations cooperative within participants correct, is analysis (1985) Johnson's and Johnson If others. on effects the irrelevant as ignoring beneficial, personally is that outcome an seeks person each Hence, theirs. achieve participants other whether on influence no has goals her or his achieves individual an whether attainments: goal among correlation no is there situation individualistic an In group. the in others to detrimental but beneficial personally are that outcomes seeks individual each Hence, theirs. achieve to fail participants other if goals their achieve only can individuals attainments: goal among correlation negative a is there situation, social competitive a In members. group all to beneficial is that outcome an seeks individual each Hence, theirs. achieve participants other if goals their achieve only can individuals attainments: goal among correlation positive a is there situations, cooperative In individualistic. and competitive cooperative, behaviour: interpersonal organize that structure goal of types three postulate (1985) Johnson and Johnson results. learning whatever of direction the and learn to motivation student's a both influence may contexts social these of all or any 7, Chapter in cussed dis- As values. and interests particular reflects and knowledge sociocultural with impregnated is which of each contexts, social interacting and dependent inter- multiple, comprises environment learning the words, other In teacher. the by organized experiences through materials learning with interaction involves it and students, other and teacher the including people, other and learner the between interactions involves It activity. solitary a not is Learning

learning group at look closer A general. in inquiry and learning for eventually, and, hand in task particular the of aspects for sponsibility re- increasing taking in students supports and encourages It responsibility. of transfer this negotiating by students empowers It function. scaffolding further a serves students and teacher between talk collaborative standing, under- facilitating in role its to addition In understanding. new building and problems novel solving in ways creative in knowledge use to and learned have they what beyond go to (eventually) students enable must formance per- assisted as learning words, other In inquiries. own their of reporting and executing planning, the for and learning own their for sponsibility re- take eventually must students independence, intellectual achieve To reasons. whatever for them, suit to happens meaning whatever construct to students permitting nor meaning imposing neither judgement: professional 171 •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

172 • Teaching and learning science as well cooperate as not. Slavin (1985, 1995) states that, after cooperative learning experiences, students express ideas and feelings more readily in class and listen more attentively to teachers. He reports a positive effect on self-esteem and claims that students more frequently, and more strongly, express feelings of belonging and being supported. Each of these effects can contribute to better learning behaviour by assisting a shift to an internal locus of control. Constructivists claim that group-based discussion promotes higher quality cognitive processes because of the opportunity for participants to confront diverse views. Whether good learning results from controversies and conflicts arising within the group depends, in part, on how the teacher manages

them and, in part, on what social skills and negotiating techniques the students already possess and can utilize to good effect. When managed constructively, controversy promotes an active search for more knowledge and better understanding to clarify the precise nature of the dispute. When poorly managed, disputes can soon become destructive.' Sometimes one member of a group will have knowledge or skills that can be passed on to others, and sometimes collaborative action can solve a problem that couldn't be solved by a student working alone. On other occasions, students will

need to consult the teacher and/or some other source of knowledge or information. For the teacher, it is a question of judging how much help is needed — a few hints that enable the group to work it out for themselves, some clear guidelines on where/how to search for the knowledge they need or some more substantial and detailed teacher input. To make this judgement, the teacher needs to engage in constant and sensitive monitoring of individual and group progress — as a co-participant, by careful reading of student logbooks and personal journals or through feedback from regular class meetings and conferences. There are, of course, major management problems associated with all forms of group learning: setting time limits and deadlines; pacing the activities; deciding when to move on; signalling the need for winding-up; and so on. Careful record keeping is essential to ensure that each group member experiences a sufficiently wide range of learning activities and engages in a sufficiently varied range of tasks. Making decisions about when and in what way to intervene with new knowledge, new skills or alternative lines of inquiry involves close monitoring of each learner's progress. As indicated previously, careful negotiation between teacher and learner is essential if teacher or peer intervention is to be appropriately located in the student's zone of proximal development. Finding sufficient time for such finely tuned dialogue, and at the particular time it is needed, is a considerable logistical problem. However, the more experienced students become in working in cooperative groups, the more capable they are of assuming responsibility for some of the more routine management tasks, thus freeing the teacher to attend to urgent matters. The different patterns of activity across groups, and the optimum scheduling of group meetings, have to be coordinated with whole-class activities. If

cooperative of introduction the resist sometimes may experiences whole-class and learning competitive of diet standardized more a to used students that note to save here, reviewed be not will literature This responsibilities. and roles different of adoption the and working of styles different encourage to approaches of range wide a devised have learning group of Advocates 1995). (Slavin

fairer is grade common a that feel they grade, same the given when wards, after- but best, is grading competitive that believe students most learning, cooperative experiencing before that, indicates evidence Research efforts. group in involvement active from withdraw might example, for distributed, evenly not was workload the perceive they because unjust, is grade common a that feel who students that is concern primary One work. group-based for grade common a assigning about worry often Teachers assessment. of issue thorny often the is Second directive. or restrictive overly being without goal-oriented are that procedures working finding and led' and 'leaders into fragmentation avoiding task, on remains everyone that ensuring is, that — group the within accountability maintaining of question the is First concerns. major two have generally work group contemplating Teachers inquiry. of theory-dependence the of reminded are students words, other In inquiry. next the conduct they which in way the mines deter- understand and know currently they what and inquiry, the conduct they how on depends learn students what process: and product between relationship reciprocal the emphasize reflections These others?' with and alone both well, worked you that feel you 'Did next?', do you would what time, more had you 'If differently?', do you would what again, starting were you 'If difficult?', most and enjoyable, most find you did investigation your of parts 'Which as: such questions to responding by learning future their for goals new set and successes their identify to encouraged be can dents Stu- role. important an play also self-evaluations Student itself? organized and worked group the way the about changed be should What valued? and recognized was contribution her or his that feel everyone Did something? do to chance a get everyone Did involved? feel everyone Did functioned. group the how on reflect to opportunities good also are Conferences crossings. border smooth assist that realities' 'multiple the develop to students helps that 2), and 1 (Chapters contexts sociocultural of variety a in located sometimes issues, controversial of confrontation this is It innovation. technological and entific sci- and inquiry scientific from indirectly or directly arising issues aesthetic and moral-ethical environmental, economic, social, of consideration a to extended be also might Reflection inquiry. scientific of nature the on and progress, learning on reflection to stimulus powerful a as act they inquiry; of lines new and ideas new trigger may they together; fit elements various the how see to students all for chance a provide They students. for tunities oppor- learning important become meetings class and conferences regular schools), primary in especially work, group organizing of way common (a inquiry general same the of aspect different a covering been has group each 173 •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

174 • Teaching and learning science

learning. This is especially noticeable among high achievers. After all, they have done well in school under the existing arrangements, and so have a vested interest in maintaining continuity. It is not easy for them to redefine their role, or the teacher's, even though it may be educationally and socially beneficial for them to do so. In addition, cooperative learning methods introduced in isolation lack social meaning for these students, and so may not be treated seriously. To be effective, they need to be an integral part of regular curriculum provision.

A plea for variety The foregoing discussion should not be interpreted as a plea for the adoption

of an unrelieved diet of cooperative learning based on small groups. It is equally important to create opportunities for students to work individually, and to follow their own interests now and again without having to negotiate with others. It is crucial that students are given time and opportunity to reflect on their own understanding and to explore and develop their own ideas through tinner dialogue'. Individual reading and writing activities play a key role here. It is also beneficial for students to experience whole-group learning. Listening to a gifted story-teller or a talented lecturer, observing and participating in a skilful teacher demonstration, watching a well made movie in the company of others: each provides a rich blend of intellectual and emotional stimulation that cannot be provided in other ways. Similarly, class field trips and excursions furnish experiences that are of inestimable value. My own preference, therefore, is for variety: a mix of individual learning, small group work and whole-class experience, with choice on any one occasion being determined by subject matter, availability of resources and facilities, and the style of learning experience in which students have most recently

engaged. Of course, students need extensive practice to develop the ability to shift easily between groups of different size and composition, while retaining the capacity to work alone when directed or invited to do so. Through experience, however, they learn to select appropriate strategies, behaviours and language for the changing interpersonal environments in which they work. Eventually, they are comfortable in all circumstances, though they may legitimately retain a preference for a particular style of working and should be encouraged to exercise it. This suggestion for constant change must be further justified. Unless it could be argued convincingly that regular change would help to prepare students for an uncertain world in which the pace of change is constantly accelerating, and that this is of greater benefit to students than the creation of an island of stability, teachers should not subscribe to a philosophy of change simply for the sake of change. However, there is a more convincing, twofold argument for the kind of variety advocated here. First, different styles of learning foster different kinds of learning. Second, breadth of experience

students which in forum supportive and open safe, a ensure always schools do Nor undertaking. demanding emotionally an such through students sustain to climate supportive sufficiently a provide not do schools Many thinking. of ways unfamiliar and new of favour in abandoned is possibly, and, lenged chal- is certainty previous venture; risky a is understanding one's turing Restruc- traditional. the from different somewhat environment educational an requires book this in advocated changes curriculum of kinds the Making

community learning a Building learner. and teacher between barrier damaging a creates and special up setting Moreover, begins. levels anxiety raises occasions' assessment when point the at stop to seen is learning significantly, more and, stopped has learning where point the at only begin to seen is science school in assessment often, Too themselves. in experiences learning significant and challenging interesting, are that activities in students engaging by learning promotes and enhances it that sense the in educative, is assessment of kind this practice, assessment traditional more with contrast In classroom. the of personalization and democratization the in role significant a play portfolios appropriately, Used culture. classroom inquiry-oriented an of extension ical log- a is portfolios of use The understanding. of framework personal dent's stu- the into insight valuable teacher the giving thus provided, experiences learning various the to response student's particular a reflecting unique, be would portfolio Each products. group be might others produced, individually be might items Some clip. video a even two, or essay an cuttings, newspaper of collection a drawing, a poem, a paper, test choice multiple a map, concept personalized a Grandma, to letter a example, for include, might portfolio A understanding. of framework personal their developing and exploring in ledge know- use to students enables portfolio) (a tasks learning authentic of tion collec- negotiated a by tests restricted and contrived Replacing procedures. evaluation and assessment to extended be should variety for case The community. learning a of maintenance and establishment the in role active an play to learning are they all, Above circumstances. home and experiences life ethnicity, gender, personality, in differences valuing and recognizing as well as possesses, students of group a that aptitudes and abilities skills, attributes, of range the appreciating and cing experien- — work they whom with individuals the of uniqueness the value to learning are They cooperation. and negotiation of skills and self-direction of skills learning are They example. for critic, and teacher friend, leader, co-worker, — roles of variety a in participate to and adaptable, and flexible be to learning are They science. than more much learning are students ences, experi- varied these through addition, In all. at choice no is experience of ignorance in made choice A procedures. assessment and methods learning to regard with self-determination of measure a them affords that system a within choices realistic and meaningful make to are students if essential is 175 •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

176 • Teaching and learning science can express their views, give and take criticism and test out their tentative understanding. Relationships that are socially and emotionally important to students, and are continuously supportive throughout these challenging and uncertain activities, are crucial for learning, because they generate the finely tuned dialogues necessary for sustaining the exploration and development of ideas. We need to prioritize both the affective and the social! Fraser (1990) reports that teachers commonly hold more favourable views about the learning environment than do their students, and that the actual

environment of most classes falls well short of that preferred by either students or teachers. The four dimensions of learning environment included in his analysis were: personalization (the degree of emphasis on opportunities for individual students to interact with the teacher and on concern for the personal welfare and social growth of the individual); participation (the ex-• tent to which students are encouraged to participate rather than be passive listeners); order and organization (the degree of emphasis on students behaving in an orderly, quiet and polite manner, and on the overall organization of classroom activities); and task orientation (the extent to which it is important to complete planned activities and to stay on-task and within designated subject matter). Interestingly, in the context of the present discussion, it is in the first two categories that the greatest discrepancies were found. Clearly, there is a need to pay much closer attention to developing a greater sense of inclusion and participation for students. Ravetz (1971) likens the scientific enterprise to cathedral building: a range of specialists with a common goal and shared values contributing, in mutually supportive ways, to a whole that is more than the sum of its individual parts. There is much to be gained by regarding the educational enterprise in a similar light. A class of students and their teacher can be seen as a 'learn-

ing community', as a group of individuals with shared values acting in mutually supportive ways in pursuit of the common purpose of effective learning for all. When students feel that they are members of a mutually supportive and caring community, they have more confidence to tackle demanding tasks, they acquire a more positive self-image and they develop a sense of responsibility for their own learning, the learning and well-being of other students and the smooth functioning of the community as a whole.

But a learning community doesn't just happen. It has to be built and it has to be supported. It is built through modelling and by example; it is supported and maintained by the continuing guidance of a skilled and caring teacher, use of curriculum activities and assessment strategies that require students to work cooperatively and adoption of appropriate administrative and organizational structures. The ways in which a teacher interacts with individual students and groups, asks and responds to questions, organizes laboratory work and field trips, manages discussions, anticipates concerns and difficulties, responds to requests, deals with disciplinary matters and so on become the model for the community. These actions shape the overall classroom climate and establish the codes of practice that determine the quality of interpersonal relationships. It is important, for example, that students

the monitoring and newsletters and journals editing classroom, the ating decor- and furnishing grounds, school the of landscaping visits, recreational and educational organizing raising, fund as things such for responsibility exercise to and affairs community in involved be to groups student for opportunities that noting worth is it book, this of scope the outside strictly While play. to role a have all Internet) the via countries other to tending ex- (perhaps groups community and schools other with ventures laborative col- speakers, guest to invitations trips, field and Visits community. wider the and school whole the involving by classroom immediate the beyond it extending means community learning a of notion the about serious Being observed. are values and behaviour of codes community and practice community that ensuring for responsibility shared accept to willing and able more become they Moreover, others. of needs and moods the to sensitivity acquire and tolerance learn skills, communication their improve they people, other of ety vari- a with work their coordinating and organizing of ways different ating negoti- By tasks. these approaching of ways different of understanding and flexibility develop they roles, of variety a in acting students other numerous with work students When teacher's. the than accessible and familiar more is that language utilizing and experiences common to reference making by point a illuminate frequently can they addition, In 1990). (Tudge novice the of development proximal of zone the in intervention and support their locating at teachers than skilled more sometimes are students recent, more are role new a learning of experiences their Because expertise. develop to novice the helps that support necessary the provide and critics structive con- as act them, fulfil to struggling are who others with empathize readily more can they themselves roles these experienced have students When like. the and reporter coordinator, facilitator, evaluator, chair, discussion tutoring), peer (through teacher roles: other of range wide a in students engaging is behaviour modelled the consolidating to keys the of One tests. norm-referenced competitive, on solely based procedures evaluation and assessment utilize to yet learning, collaborative encourage to example, for absurd, be would It consistent. be is: message simple The teacher. the by modelled values and expectations behaviours, the reinforcing in role important an play structures organizational and management class Curriculum, exhibited. are they when commended and community the of member other every of expected teacher, the by modelled consistently be to need they practice, of code established community's the of part become to are view of points and beliefs others' for respect and collaboration if Similarly, commended. and acknowledged is behaviour such when especially suit, follow to encouraged are students so, do to seen clearly are and appropriately, respond and carefully listen teachers When employed. words particular the behind message the hear to trying by second, bad; or good either history, previous of grounds the on contribution student's a pre-judging not by first, behaviour: listening careful model should and can Teachers students. other by and teacher the by to, listened be will say they what that know 177 •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

178 • Teaching and learning science

school's energy consumption are invaluable for fostering intellectual independence and critical scientific literacy, developing a sense of community and an awareness of the needs, interests and aspirations of others, establishing a sense of ownership and responsibility for self-directed learning, sensitizing students to moral and ethical issues and cultivating environmental and sociopolitical awareness.

The skills of working cooperatively with others, and the values and atti-

tudes that underpin the notion of a learning community, are, as argued above, built up over time through modelling, negotiating and acknowledging the contributions of others, not by laying down a set of rules. While rules may be useful in facilitating the efficient execution of tasks with clear, predetermined and expected outcomes, they are of little value in the pursuit of more diffuse goals relating to continuing learning, personal development and intellectual independence, and may actually hinder them. For such an enterprise, the strict rules often found in schools have to be replaced by a commitment to negotiate the most supportive and facilitative climate for the particular participants. In a learning community, teacher—student interaction is viewed as a process of negotiating and co-constructing meaning, not imposing it. This applies just as much to the meanings that underpin ways of organizing classroom learning as it does to the learning itself. As an aside, it is worth mentioning that a particularly powerful enabling tool for the maintenance of a learning community is the Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE), through which participants use a database

to compile notes and critical comments on the topic under discussion (Scardamalia and Bereiter 1994). Given the authoritarian and hierarchical system typical of most schools,

it is inevitable that children will learn that power and status are the most significant features of human relationships. Curriculum decisions and matters of school organization are invariably in the hands of teachers; students are rarely, if ever, consulted. Many teachers use their power to enforce learning styles that may not be appropriate for some students. Often there is an almost unrelieved diet of instruction-based teaching and worksheet-driven practical work. Not only is this practice pedagogically unsound, but it reinforces those implicit messages about power and authority. Moreover, since senior positions in most schools are held by white males, there is an additional powerful message relating status and power to ethnicity and gender.2 A more democratic school system and more democratic classroom organization could project a different set of messages: mutual tolerance, respect and value for all, the importance of conflict resolution through negotiation and compromise. Needless to say, a more equitable distribution of senior posts would project a significantly different message about ethnicity, gender, status and power. Recommendations on appointments and on alternative styles of school government (such as the collegial system operated within the Rudolph Steiner schools) fall outside the scope of this book, but recommendations for alternative teaching and learning methods and alternative forms of cur-

riculum organization do not. Above all, there needs to be a much greater

emancipatory discussing in Indeed, teachers. with rest must development of pace and direction the of Control predetermined. be change of extent and nature precise the can Nor change. to teachers exhort to even or compel to trying by achieved be cannot desirable, however development, teacher that tion recogni- is approach research action the underpinning Also board. school or authority education local Education, of Ministry the from down handed is it because just unquestioningly, accepted be should Nothing strategies. ation evalu- and assessment or activities, learning and teaching content, goals, be it whether granted, for taken be should Nothing revision. and appraisal critical scrutiny, to open and problematic, as regarded be should ledge know- curriculum all that is research action of principle fundamental A opportunity. an such provides research Action themselves. learning of sort this experienced have to need they mode, inquiry the in successfully teach and learning, of principles these implement to are teachers if that argued be also could It approach. research action an of adoption the through development curriculum and education teacher of tasks twin the to inquiry of community a of notion the extending by achieved be best can attributes of set demanding This practice. current on reflection critical through learn to capacity a and groups, sociocultural different many from people of values and attitudes aspirations, experiences, knowledge, the to sensitivity a also but matters, educational and entific sci- of range wide a of understanding robust and deep only not requires science, school and science of subcultures the into crossings border negotiate to students all enable that ways in intervene to how and when about sions deci- on-the-spot making here, described style the in effectively Teaching skills. acquired previously of set a of implementation about than learning continued to commitment about more is education teacher of view This agents. change as acting teachers expert more with consultation and colleagues with discussion research, classroom writing, reading, by formed in- practice, existing on reflection critical through connoisseurship towards expertise their develop experience with teachers Those support. and critic guide, model, as acting practitioner skilled a alongside working by teach, to learn and teaching, about learn teachers student that proposal the to leads science of learning student for advocated model apprenticeship the of tion Adop- teachers. of community the of values and attitudes conduct, of codes language, knowledge, procedural and conceptual the into enculturation as regarded be can education teacher words, other In education. science school to do they as education teacher in-service and pre-service to much as just apply they and students, to do they as teachers to much as just apply they valid, are book this of chapters later the in out set learning of principles lithe

education teacher for Implications spirit. ity

commun- of fostering the and negotiation responsibility, mutual on emphasis 179 •

teacher the of role the work: it Making

180 • Teaching and learning science

action research, Kemmis (1988: 47) advises teachers to work alone, without interference even from researchers and developers, in order to free themselves

from 'irrational or unjust habits, customs, precedents, coercion, or bureaucratic systemization'. Outsiders, says Kemmis, are unnecessary. My own view is that outsiders are necessary, and that there is an important role for a change agent acting as a facilitator, critic and support for a group of teachers engaged in curriculum renewal. Through dialogue with the change agent, attention is focused on criticizing, challenging, modifying and changing teachers' beliefs, understandings, attitudes, skills, values and rela-

tionships, rather than on providing 'curriculum information'. This approach assumes that teachers can acquire the expertise necessary for effective curriculum development by refining and extending the practical professional knowledge they already possess through critical collaborative activity supported by change agents (or researcher/facilitators), whose work involves fostering critical awareness, enhancing curriculum problem-solving skills and assisting the group in working through conflicts by the provision of whatever research-based, theoretical knowledge may be appropriate, in whatever form is appropriate (Pedretti and Hodson 1995; Bencze and Hodson 1998; Hodson and Bencze 1998). Teaching is a complex and uncertain business, but we get better at it by critical reflection on practice and on the arguments for different approaches. Those who claim that there is only one way to teach science, or that there is one best way, mistake the nature of the enterprise. Teachers need the courage to be wrong and to make mistakes, but they also need the commitment to learn from their mistakes. When we expect to make mistakes, we can use them to inform our thinking. In other words, the key to professional development, as to any form of intellectual independence, is to have a mastery or learning orientation rather than a performance orientation, and a commitment to learn, a commitment to seek better, more appropriate, more effective ways to teach science. Of course, this necessitates a shift in the way in which teachers are appraised and evaluated. There is no room for predetermined checklists of teacher behaviours. The guarantee of good and improving educational provision is not the strict application of a rigorous form of teacher appraisal in relation to a prespecified list of approved behaviours, but teacher commitment to trying to find the wisest way to proceed in the circumstances. It is this commitment that constitutes the ethical drive of the connoisseur teacher.

Notes 1 Rudduck and Cowie (1988) give advice on how to manage learning groups and how to teach students the skills of self-management that enable groups to function more effectively.

2 'Most schools' refers to schools in those countries with which I am most familiar: the UK, Canada, the USA, New Zealand and Australia.

Winston.

&

Rinehart Holt, York: New View. Cognitive A Psychology: Educational (1968) D.P. Ausubel, 1—37. 82 33: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal agenda, research education science multicultural the into infusion constructivism: Social (1996) M.M. Atwater, 91—122. 112: Daedalus, literacy, scientific wider Achieving (1983) A.B. Arons, 269—74. 93: Mathematics, and Science School perspective, structivist con- a from science teaching practice: guide to theory Using (1993) K. Appleton, 261—71. 84: Psychology, Educational of Journal motivation, student and structures, goals, Classrooms: (1992) C. Ames, Press. University Oxford Oxford: Literacy. Scientific for Benchmarks (1993) Science of Advancement the for Association American AAAS. DC: Washington, Technology. and Mathematics, Science, in Goals Literacy on Report 2061 Project A Americans. All for Science (1989) Science of Advancement the for Association American 217—38. 81: Education, Science curriculum, technology and science cross-cultural Nations First a Toward (1997) G.S. Aikenhead, 1—52. 27: Education, Science in Studies science, of subculture the into crossing border education: Science (1996) G. Aikenhead, Press. College Teachers York: New Refonn. on Perspectives International tion: Educa- Science—Technology—Society (eds) Aikenhead G. and Solomon J. In perspective. research a STS: through science learning to Consequences (1994) G. Aikenhead, Detselig. Calgary: Canada. in Policy Literacy of Foundations (eds) Phillips L.M. and Norris S.P. In practice. room class- and reasoning, critical literacy, scientific/technological (1990) G.S. Aikenhead, English. of Teachers of Council National IL: Urbana, Language. through Humanities and Science Integrating Curriculum: Astonishing The (ed.) Tchudi S. In science. writing and reading storyteller: to tourist From (1993) G. Pagnucci, and D. Abt-Perkins, Hall. Prentice NJ: Cliffs, Englewood edn. 2nd Science, Children Teaching (1988) J. Abruscato, 79—83. 78(285): Review, Science School concepts, science of understanding children's assess to interviews Using (1997) J. Scaife, and A. Abdullah, 223—50. 16: Behavior, Social of Theory the for Journal possessions, like are Beliefs (1986) R.P. Abelson,

References

182 • Teaching and learning science Ausubel, D.P., Novak, J.D. and Hanesian, H. (1978) Educational Psychology: A Cognitive

View, 2nd edn. New York: bit, Rinehart & Winston. Baird, J.R. (1986) Improving learning through enhanced metacognition: a classroom study, European Journal of Science Education, 8: 263—82. Baird, J.R. and Mitchell, I.J. (eds) (1986) Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning: An Australian Case Study — the PEEL Project. Clayton, Victoria: Monash University. Baird, J.R. and Northfield, R.J. (eds) (1992) Learning from the PEEL Experience. Clayton, Victoria: Monash University.

Bajracharya, H. and Brouwer, W. (1997) A narrative approach to science teaching in Nepal, International Journal of Science Education, 19: 429—46.

Baker, D. and Taylor, P.C.S. (1995) The effect of culture on the learning of science in non-western countries: the results of an integrated research review, International Journal of Science Education, 17: 695—704.

Bakhtin, M.M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Bakhtin, MM. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Barker, M. and Carr, M.D. (1989) Photosynthesis: can our pupils see the wood for the trees?, Journal of Biological Education, 23: 41—4.

Barlex, D. and Carre, C. (1985) Visual Communication in Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barnes, D. (1988) Oral language and learning. In S. Hynds and D. Rubin (eds) Perspectives on Talk and Learning. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Barrass, R. (1984) Some misconceptions and misunderstandings perpetuated by teachers and textbooks of biology, Journal of Biological Education, 18: 201—6. Bell, B.F. (1981) When is an animal not an animal?, Journal of Biological Education, 15: 2 13—18.

Bell, B. (collator) (1995) Responses to 'Challenging NZ Science Education' by Michael R. Matthews. Hamilton: University of Waikato.

Bencze, J.L. (1996) Correlational studies in school science: breaking the science— experiment—certainty connection, School Science Review, 78(282): 95—101.

Bencze, L. and Hodson, D. (1998) Coping with uncertainty in elementary school science: a case study in collaborative action research, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 4: 77—94. Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (1987) The Psychology of Written Composition. Hillsdale,

NJ: Erlbaum. Bettencourt, A. (1992) On what it means to understand science. In S. Hills (ed.) The History and Philosophy of Science in Science Education, vol. 1. Kingston, ON: Queen's University.

Bhaskara Rao, D. (1992) Scientific attitude in secondary school pupils. In S. Hills (ed.) The History and Philosophy of Science in Science Education, vol. II. Kingston, ON:

Queen's University. Biddulph, F. and Osborne, R.J. (1984) Making Sense of Our World: An Interactive Teaching Approach. Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato. Black, P.J. and Lucas, A.M. (eds) (1993) Children's Informal Ideas in Science. London: Routledge. Bloom, B .S. (1976) Human Characteristics and School Learning. New York: McGraw Hill.

Bloom, J.W. (1992) Contexts of meaning and conceptual integration: how children understand and learn. In R.A. Duschl and R.J. Hamilton (eds) Philosophy of Science,

707—19. 69: Education, Science genetics, teaching for gestions sug- some and genetics in difficulties and misconceptions of sources as textbooks biology school high of investigation An (1985) F. Norland, and J. Kahle, H-H., Cho, 1—49. 63: Research, Educational of view Re- instruction, science for implications and framework theoretical A acquisition. knowledge in data anomalous of role The (1993) W.F. Brewer, and C.A. Chinn, Press. York New of University State Albany: tion. Educa- Society and Technology Science, about Constructively Thinking (1992) D.W. Cheek, Press. Academic FL: Orlando, Change. Conceptual and Structure Cognitive (eds) Pines A.L. and West L.H.T. In students. physics among structures cognitive in changes Effecting (1985) L.E. Klopfer, and R.F. Gunstone, A.B., Champagne, 255—65. 67: Education, Science test, draw-a-scientist the scientist: the of images Stereotypic (1982) D.W. Chambers, Press. sity Univer- Open Keynes: Milton Science? Called Thing This Is What (1980) A.F. Chalmers, 1—59. 3 5: Education, Science in Studies education, science and Epistemology (1978) J.A. Rowell, and E.R. Cawthron, Chemistry. of Society Royal London: Science. in Matter that Words (1985) A.H. Johnstone, and J.R.T. Cassels, Bass. Jossey Francisco: San Mathematics. Children's (eds) Gearhart M. and Saxe G.B. In life. everyday in concepts Mathematical (1988) D.W. Carraher, and A.D. Schliemann, TN., Carraher, 83—97. 18: Education, Mathematics in Research for Journal ematics, math- oral and Written (1987) A.D. Schliemann, and D.W. Carraher, T.N., Carraher, 21—9. 3: Psychology, Developmental of Journal British schools, in and streets the in Mathematics (1985) A.D. Schliemann, and D.W. Carraher, T.N., Carraher, 123—30. 41: Psychologist, American education, science and science Cognitive (1986) 5. Carey, 67—75. 80: Psychology, Educational of Journal adolescence, during reasoning scientific contradiction: to Response (1988) C. M. Linn, and C. N. Burbules, 60—70. 20: Practice, into Theory learning, experiential through goals STS Achieving (1992) S.A. Brusic, Press. University Harvard MA: Cambridge, Meaning. of Acts (1990) J.S. Bruner, Press. University bridge Cam- Cambridge: Perspectives. Vygotskian Cognition: and Communication Culture, (ed.) Wertsch J.V. In perspective. conceptual and historical a Vygotsky: (1985) J.S. Bruner, Press. University Oxford Oxford: Language. Use to Learning Talk: Child's (1983) J.S. Bruner, Penguin. Harmondsworth: Education. of Relevance The (1971) J.S. Bruner, 32—42. 18: Researcher, Educational learning, of culture the and cognition Situated (1989) P. Duguid, and A. Collins, J.S., Brown, Press. University Harvard MA: Cambridge, Development. Human of Ecology The (1979) U. Bronfenbrenner, 7—8. (October): 134 Newsletter, Education Science world, the across Science (1997) Council British Library. Philosophical York: New Physicist. a of Reflections (1950) P.W. Bridgman, 167—87. 17: Education, Science of Journal International perspective, methodological a as maps context meaning:

of contexts children's of scope the extending and Assessing (1995) J.W. Bloom, Press. York New of University State Albany: Practice. and Theory Educational and Psychology, Cognitive

183 •

References

184 • Teaching and learning science Clark, H. (1985) Thoughts on the epistemological effects of conceptual change teaching, cited as personal communication by M. Watts and D. Bentley (1987) Constructivism

in the classroom: enabling conceptual change by words and deeds, British Educational Research Journal, 13: 12 1—35.

Claxton, G. (1989) Cognition doesn't matter if you're scared, depressed or bored. In P. Adey, J. Bliss, J. Head and M. Shayer (eds) Adolescent Development and School Science.

Lewes: Falmer Press. Claxton, G. (1990) Teaching to Learn: A Direction for Education. London: Cassell. Claxton, G. (1991) Educating the Inquiring Mind: The Challenge for School Science. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Claxton, G. (1993) Minitheories: a preliminary model for learning science. In P.J. Black and A.M. Lucas (eds) Children's Informal Ideas in Science. London: Routledge.

Cobern, W.W. (1991) World View Theory and Science Education Research. NARST monograph no. 3. Cincinnati, OH: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.

Cobern, W.W. (1993) Contextual constructivism: the impact of culture on the learning and teaching of science. In K. Tobin (ed.) The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Hilisdale, NJ: Eribaum.

Cobern, W.W. (1995) Science education as an exercise in foreign affairs, Science and Education, 4: 287—302.

Cobern, W.W. (1996) Woridview theory and conceptual change in science education, Science Education, 80: 579—6 10.

Cole, M. and Scribner, S. (1978) Introduction. In L.S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cosgrove, M., Osborne, R.J. and Tasker, R. (1982) Towards Generative Learning, LISP working paper no. 205. Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato. Costa, V.B. (1995) When science is 'another world': relationships between worlds of family, friends, school, and science, Science Education, 79: 313—33. Danserau, D.F. (1985) Learning strategy research. In J. Segal, S. Chipman and R. Glaser (eds) Thinking and Learning Skills: Vol. 1. Relating Instruction to Research. Hillsdale, NJ:

Eribaum. Davies, F. and Greene, T. (1984) Reading for Learning in the Sciences. Edinburgh: Oliver Er

Boyd.

Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Delamont, S., Beynon, J. and Atkinson, P. (1988) In the beginning was the Bunsen: the foundations of secondary school science, Qualitative Studies in Education, 1: 315—28. Demastes, S.S., Good, R.G. and Peebles, P. (1995) Students' conceptual ecologies and the process of conceptual change in evolution, Science Education, 79: 637—66.

Demastes, S.S., Good, R.G. and Peebles, P. (1996) Patterns of conceptual change in evolution, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33: 407—31. Department of Education and Science (1975) A Language for Life (the Bullock Report). London: HMSO.

Diener, CI. and Dweck, CS. (1978) An analysis of learned helplessness: ongoing changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognition following failure, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36: 45 1—62.

Diener, CI. and Dweck, C.S. (1980) An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of success, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39: 940—52.

di Sessa, A. (1982) Unlearning Aristotelian physics: a case study of knowledge-based learning, Cognitive Science, 6: 37—75.

Addison-Wesley. MA: Reading, Behavior. Teaching Analysing (1970) A. N. Flanders, 8—97. 2 3: Science, of Philosophy the in Studies Minnesota empiricism, and reduction Explanation, (1962) P.K. Feyerabend, 1—16. 15: Education, Science in Studies struction, in- science in events discrepant or Inconsistent (1988) H. Kass, and P.J. Fensham, Zealand. New of Society Royal The Wellington: ive. Perspect- Zealand Aotearoa/New An Ethnicity: and Education Technology and Science (ed.) Hodson D. In crossing. border sub-cultural and education Science (1998) P.J. Fensham, Printer. Government Queensland Brisbane: 2. vol. Future, the Shaping (eds) Tolhurst T. and McMeniman M. Wiltshire, K. In education. Science (1994) P.J. Fensham, Press. Falmer Lewes: Science. School and Development Adolescent (eds) Shayer M. and Head J. Bliss, J. Adey, P. In ively. construct- teach to teachers assist to how practice: into Theory (1989) P.J. Fensham, Centre. Education Waikato Zealand: New Hamilton, Science. Primary Teaching (1988) M. Cosgrove, and J. Faire, 251—301. 58: Research, Educational of Review education, science in perspectives research four of examination an instruction: and Learning (1988) M. Linn, and B. Eylon, Wiley. John Chichester: Teaching. and Learning of Styles (1981) N. Entwistle, Heinemann. London: Plunge. the Taking Science: Primary (ed.) Harlen W. In dialogue. interaction, Encounter, (1985) J. Elstgeest, 1—95. 26 33: Journal, Research Educational American re-examination, a literacy: scientific for conditions the Creating (1996) S.F. Marion, and E. Finkel, M., Eisenhart, Methuen. London: Classroom. the in ing Understand- of Development the Knowledge: Common (1987) N. Mercer, and D. Edwards, 268—76. 14: Psychology, Developmental analysis, experimental An (III) classroom: the in feedback evaluative of contingencies The (II) helplessness: learned in differences Sex (1978) B. Enna, and S. Nelson, W., Davidson, C.S., Dweck, 1040—8. 41: Psychologist, American learning, affecting processes

Motivational (1986) C.S. Dweck, UNESCO. Paris: tion.

Educa- of Reform the to Universities African of Contribution The (1980) M.O.A. Durojaiye, Press. Atheneum York: New Theory. Physical of Structure and Aim The (1962) P. Duhem, Routledge. London: Ideas. Children's into Research Science: Secondary of Sense Making (1994b) V. Wood-Robinson, and P. Rushworth, A., Squires, R., Dnver, Press. University Open Keynes: Milton Tiberghien, and E. Guesne, R., Driver, Science. in Ideas Children's (1985) (eds) A.

37—60. 10: Education, Science in Studies science, in frameworks conceptual students' of study the in issues empirical and theoretical some Theories-in-action: (1983) G. Erickson, and R. Driver, 443—56. 67(240): Review, Science School view, constructivist a science: of learning the and thinking Students' (1986) B. Bell, and R. Driver, 5—12. 23: Researcher, Educational classroom, the in knowledge scientific Constructing (1994a) P. Scott, and E. Mortimer, J., Leach, H., Asoko, R., Driver, Press. Falmer Lewes: Science. School and Development Adolescent (eds) Shayer M. and Head J. Bliss, J. Adey, P. In conceptions. Changing (1989) R. Driver, Press. University Open Keynes: Milton Scientist? as Pupil The (1983) R. Driver, Press. Falmer Lewes: Science. School and Development Adolescent (eds) Shayer M. and Head J. Bliss, J. Adey, P. In class. social and courses science of demand Conceptual (1989) A.M. Domingos, Collins. London: For? Science Is What (1973) B. Dixon,

185 •

References

186 • Teaching and learning science Fleming, R. (1986) Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues. Part I: Social cognition, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23: 677—87; Part II: Nonsocial cognition, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23: 689—98.

Flick, L.B. (1995) Navigating a sea of ideas: teacher and students negotiate a course toward mutual relevance, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32: 1065—82. Fraser, B.J. (1990) Students' perceptions of their classroom environments. In K. Tobin, J.B. Kahie and B.J. Fraser (eds) (1990) Windows into Science Classrooms: Problems Associated with Higher-level Cognitive Learning. London: Falmer Press. Fuller, 5. (1988) Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Furnham, A. (1992) Lay understanding of science: young people and adults' ideas of scientific concepts, Studies in Science Education, 20: 29—64.

Galbraith, P.L., Carss, M.C., Grice, RD., Endean, L. and Warry, M. (1997) Towards scientific literacy for the third millennium: a view from Australia, International Journal of Science Education, 19: 447—67. Galili, I. and Bar, V. (1992) Motion implies

force: where to expect vestiges of the

misconceptions, International Journal of Science Education, 14: 63—81. Gardner, H. (1984) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. London: Heinemann.

Gauld, CF. and Hukins, A.A. (1980) Scientific attitudes: a review, Studies in Science Education, 7: 129—61.

Gayford, C. (1992) Patterns of group behaviour in open-ended problem-solving in science classes of 15-year-old students in England, International Journal of Science Education, 14: 41—9.

Gazzaniga, M. (1988) Mind Matters. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Geddis, AN. (1992) Using truth strategies to develop a more adequate view of observation for the science classroom. In S. Hills (ed.) History and Philosophy of Science in Science Education, vol. 1. Kingston, ON: Queen's University.

George, J.M. (1995) Health education challenges in a rural context: a case study, Studies in Science Education, 25: 239—62.

George, J. and Glasgow, J. (1988) Street science and conventional science in the West Indies, Studies in Science Education, 15: 109—18.

Gilbert, J.K. and Watts, D.M. (1983) Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: changing perspectives in science education, Studies in Science Education, 10: 61—98.

Gil-Perez, D. (1996) New trends in science education, International Journal of Science Education, 18: 889—901.

Gil-Perez, D. and Carrascosa-Alis, J. (1985) Science learning as a conceptual and methodological change, European Journal of Science Education, 7: 231—6.

Gil-Perez, D. and Carrascosa-Alis, J. (1994) Bringing pupils' learning closer to a scientific construction of knowledge: a permanent feature of innovations in science teaching, Science Education, 78: 301—15. Giroux, H. (1992) Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education. New

York: Routledge.

Glynn, S.M. and Muth, D. (1994) Reading and writing to learn science: achieving scientific literacy, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31: 1057—73. Gott, R. and Duggan, 5. (1995) Investigative Work in the Science Curriculum. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Gott, R. and Duggan, 5. (1996) Practical work: its role in the understanding of evidence in science, International Journal of Science Education, 18: 79 1—806. Gough, N. (1993) Laboratories in Fiction: Science Education and Popular Media. Geelong, Victoria: Deaking University Press.

33—40. 70: Review, Science School science, school in work practical at look critical A (1990) D. Hodson, 53—66. 20: Theory, and sophy Philo- Educational teaching, science and science in Experiments (1988) D. Hodson, 381—96. 18: Studies, Curriculum of Journal education, science in observation of status and role the Rethinking (1986) D. Hodson, 3—30. 2 64: Review, Science School II, Part —52; 643 63: Review, Science School I, Part truth? of pursuit the — Science (1982) D. Hodson, 5—86. 15 73: Education, Science sense? common or science primitive phenomena: natural about beliefs 'untutored' Students' (1989) G.L. Hills, 549—71. 60: Research, Educational of Review learning, for resource mental a as contribution its and Interest (1990) S. Hidi, Routledge. London: Practice. and Principles Issues, Peace: for Education (1988) D. Hicks, 1—3. 54 11: Education, Science of Journal International classroom, the in change conceptual of conditions The (1989) N.R. Thorley, and P.W. Hewson, 1—13. 13: Science, Instructional instruction, science of design the and change ceptual con- in conflict conceptual of role The (1984) M.G. Hewson, and P.W. Hewson, 383—96. 3: Education, Science of Journal European science, learning to approach change conceptual A (1981) P.W. Hewson, 1—41. 22: Education, Science in Studies learning, classroom for implications apprenticeship: cognitive and cognition Situated (1993) S. Hennessy, 643—53. 20: Education, Science of Journal International work, practical in goals and context community: the and/in Science (1998) J.V. Helms, 291—307. 24: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal thinking, scientific and everyday of cultures the bridging for Tools (1987) R.D. Pea, and J. Hawkins, Wheatsheaf. Harvester York: New Knowing. and Learning of Ways Cognition: and Context (eds) Butterworth G. and Light P. In knowledge. conceptual of construction the through cognition Desituating (1992) K. Inagaki, and G. Hatano, 229—49. 8: Education, Science of Journal European change, conceptual of explanation an Toward (1986) M.Z. Hashweh, Fulton. David London: Science. of Teaching The (1992) W. Harlen, 385—403. 16: Education, Science of Journal International physics, introductory in knowledge conceptual about beliefs Students' (1994) D. Hammer, 1—9. 29 65: Education, Science gravity, Understanding (1981) R. White, and R. Gunstone, 2. no. Yearbook ICASE Teacher. Science the to Says Research What In science. children's considering for strategies teaching Two (1988) Group Science Children's Monash the and I.J. Mitchell, R.F., Gunstone, Press. Palmer London: Learning. and Teaching its to Approach Constructivist A Science: of Content The (eds) White R.T. and Gunstone R.F. Fensham, P.J. In metacognition. of enhancement the in content science specific of importance The (1994) R.F. Gunstone, Press. University Open Buckingham: Science. School in Work Practical of Reality and Role The Science: Practical (ed.) nough Wool- BE. In experience. practical from theory Restructuring (1991) R.F. Gunstone, Press. Palmer Lewes: Education. Science in Dilemmas and ment Develop- (ed.) Fensham P.J. In education. science in Learners (1988) R.F. Gunstone, Press. University Open Keynes: Milton Science. in Ideas Children's (eds) Tiberghien A. and Guesne E. Driver, R. In Light. (1985) E. Guesne, 217—26. 13: tion,

Educa- Science of Journal International education, science in events of understanding inform to semiotics of potential The (1991) J. Willinsky, and B. Shapiro, B., Groisman,

187 • References

188 • Teaching and learning science Hodson, D. (1992) Assessment of practical work: some considerations in philosophy of science, Science and Education, 1: 115—44.

Hodson, D. (1993a) In search of a rationale for multicultural science education, Science Education, 77: 685—711.

Hodson, D. (1993b) Philosophic stance of secondary school teachers, curriculum experiences, and children's understanding of science: some preliminary findings, Interchange, 1 and 2: 4 1—52.

Hodson, D. (1993c) Re-thinking old ways; towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science, Studies in Science Education, 22: 85—142.

Hodson, D. (1993d) Teaching and learning about science: considerations in the philosophy and sociology of science. In D. Edwards, E. Scanlon and D. West (eds) Teaching, Learning and Assessment in Science Education. London: Paul Chapman/Open University. Hodson, D. (1994) Seeking directions for change: the personalisation and politicisation of science education, Curriculum Studies, 2: 71—98. Hodson, D. (1998) Personalizing, de-mythologizing and politicizing: critical multiculturalism in science and technology education. In S. May (ed.) Critical Multiculturalism: Rethinking Multicultural and Antiracist Education. Lewes: Falmer Press.

Hodson, D. and Bencze, L. (1998) Becoming critical about practical work: changing views and changing practice through action research, International Journal of Science Education, 20: 683—94.

Hodson, D. and Prophet, B. (1986) A bumpy start to science education, New Scientist, 1521: 25—8.

Hodson, D. and Reid, D. (1988) Science for all: motives, meanings and implications. School Science Review, 69: 653—61.

Hodson, J. (1996) The effects of peer collaboration on writing performance and attitudes towards writing of male and female standard 3/4 students. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Auckland.

Hofstein, A. and Kempa, R.F. (1985) Motivating strategies in science education: attempt at an analysis, European Journal of Science Education, 7: 221—9. Holman, J. (ed.) (1986) Science and Technology in Society: Teaching Units and Teacher's Guide. Hatfield: Association for Science Education. Holton, G. (1978) The Scientific Imagination: Case Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Holton, G. (1986) The Advancement of Science and Its Burdens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Howe, A.C. and Thompsen, P. (1989) Overview of the seminar. In P. Adey, J. Bliss, J. Head and M. Shayer (eds) Adolescent Development and School Science. Lewes: Falmer Press.

Hughes, M. and Grieve, R. (1983) On asking children bizarre questions. In M. Donaldson, R. Grieve and C. Pratt (eds) Early Childhood Development and Education. Oxford: Blackwell. Hume, D. (1854) Of the understanding. In Philosophical Works, vol. 1. Edinburgh: Adam

and Charles Black (reprinted by Scientia Verlag, 1964). Hunt, A. (ed.) (1990) SATIS 16—19. Hatfield: Association for Science Education.

Hynd, C.R., McWhorter, J.Y., Phares, V.L. and Suttles, C.W. (1994) The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31: 93 3—46.

Jegede, 0. (1995) Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics education in Africa, Studies in Science Education, 25: 97—1 37.

Sage. London: Observed. Science (eds) Mulkay M. and Cetina Knorr- K.D. In work. scientific of study ethnographic The (1983) K.D. Knorr-Cetina, 665—82. 20: Education, Science of Journal International work, practical computer-based education: science in laboratories' 'Dry (1998) W. Huisman, and P.A. Kirschner, Waikato. of University thesis. DPhil Unpublished classrooms. science junior school secondary Zealand New in concept energy the about learning and teaching change: a for Energy (1989) V.M. Kirkwood,

Wiley. John York: New Practice. Curriculum of Theory A Knowledge: of Disciplines the and Curriculum The (1966) J.A. Brownell, and A.R. King, 205—16. 195—203; 12: tion, Educa- Science of Journal International 2, and 1 Parts science. in modes instructional different for preferences and traits Motivational (1990) M.M. Diaz, and R.F. Kempa, 743—54. 17: Education, Science of Journal International science, in work group from Learning (1995) A. Ayob, and R.F. Kempa, 1—54. 34 13: Education, Science of Journal International science, in work group in interactions Learning (1991) A. Ayob, and R.F. Kempa, Press. Pergamon London: Handbook. International An Measurement: and logy Methodo- Research, Educational (ed.) Keeves J.P. In research. Action (1988) S. Kemmis, 355—75. 81: Education, Science constructivism, radical to lenge chal- philosophical a context: comparative in traditions Research (1997) G.J. Kelly, Norton. York: New Constructs. Personal of Psychology The (1955) G.A. Kelly, Press. University Open Keynes: Milton Girls? for Science (ed.) Kelly A. In science. masculine of construction The (1987) A. Kelly, 1—20. 5: Education, and Science education, Western and Japanese in science of concepts The (1996) K. Kawasaki, English. of Teachers of Council National IL: Urbana, Disciplines. the across Learn to Writing Sawdust: the in Roots (ed.) Gere Ruggles A. In journal. course The (1985) P. Juell, 481—90. 12: Education, Science of Journal International learning?, to hindrance or Help classroom: physics the into applications technological Introducing (1990) C.M. Kirk, and A.T. Jones, 15—27. August, Journal, Studies Women's Zealand New room, class- the in race class, Gender, lose? to learning are girls Which (1985) A. Jones, 71—3. 19: Chemistry, in Education work, practical of demands The (1982) A.J.B. Wham, and A.H. Johnstone, 561—77. 80: Education, Science ideas, children's from evidence and Constructivism (1996) R. Gott, and P. Johnson, Bacon. & Allyn Boston: edn. 4th Learning, Individualistic and Cooperative, Alone: and Together Learning (1994) R.T. Johnson, and D.W. Johnson, Press. Plenum York: New Learn. to Cooperating Cooperate, to Learning (eds) Schmuck R. and Webb C. Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. Kagan, S. Sharan, S. Slavin, R. In groups. ing learn- cooperative of dynamics internal The (1985) R.T. Johnson, and D.W. Johnson, 229—46. 24: Studies, Curriculum of Journal reconstruction, a towards education: science School (1992) E.W. Jenkins, 43—51. 71: Review, Science School education, science school and literacy Scientific (1990) E.W. Jenkins, Zealand. New of Society Royal The Wellington: Perspective. Zealand Aotearoa/New An Ethnicity: and Education Technology and Science (ed.) Hodson D. In education. technology and science and presuppositions Woridview (1998) 0. Jegede,

189 • References

190 • Teaching and learning science Kozulin, A. (1990) Vygotsky 's Psychology: A Biography of Ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press. Kruglanski, A.W. (1989) Lay Epistemics and Human Knowledge: Cognitive and Motivational Bases. New York: Plenum. Krugly-Smolska, E. (1995) Cultural influences in science education, International Journal of Science Education, 17: 45—58.

Krugly-Smolska, E. (1996) Scientific culture, multiculturalism and the science classroom, Science and Education, 5: 21—9.

Kuhn, D. (1989) Children and adults as intuitive scientists, Psychological Review, 56: 674—89. Kuhn, T.S. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kuhn, T.S. (1977) The Essential Tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kyle, W.C. (1996) Editorial: the importance of investing in human resources, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33: 1—4.

Lakatos, I. (1978) The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Larkin, J.H. (1983) The role of problem representation in physics. In D. Gentner and A.L. Stevens (eds) Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Larson, J.O. (1995) Fatima's rules and other elements of an unintended chemistry curriculum. Conference paper, AERA Annual Meeting, San Francisco. Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. New

York: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J. (1991) Situating learning in communities of practice. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine and S.D. Teasley (eds) Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Layton, D. (1986) Revaluing science education. In P. Tomlinson and M. Quinton (eds) Values Across the Curriculum. Lewes: Falmer Press. Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S. and Davey, A. (1993) Inarticulate Science? Driffield: Studies in Education. Lemke, J.L. (1987) Social semiotics and science education, American Journal of Semiotics, 5: 217—32.

Lemke, J.L. (1990) Talking Science: Language, Learning and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Leont'ev, A.N. (1981) The problem of activity in psychology. In J.V. Wertsch (ed.) The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.

Longino, H. (1994) The fate of knowledge in social theories of science. In F.T. Schmitt (ed.) Socializing Epistemology: the Social Dimensions of Knowledge. Lanham, MD: Rowman

and Littlefield. Loving, C. (1997) From the summit of truth to its slippery slopes: science education's journey through positivist-postmodern territory, American Educational Research Journal, 34: 42 1—52.

Lucas, A.M. (1991) 'Infotainment' and informal sources for learning science, International Journal of Science Education, 13: 495—504.

Lunzer, E. and Gardner, K. (1979) Learning from the Written Word. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. McClelland, G. (1983) Discussion in science lessons, School Science Review, 65: 129—33. McCombs, B.L. and Pope, J.E. (eds) (1994) Motivating Hard to Reach Students. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Press. OISE Toronto: Education. Science from Essays Light: New a in Curriculum Seeing (eds) Russell T. and Orpwood G. Munby, H. In independence. intellectual for teaching Analyzing (1980) H. Munby, Unwin. and Allen London: Knowledge. of Sociology the and Science (1979) M. Mulkay, 267—85. 4: Education,

and Science change? profile conceptual or change Conceptual (1995) E.F. Mortimer, 349—71. 32: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal classroom, science school high a in talk teacher of effects the of interpretation an science: about Talking (1995) E.B. Moje, University.

Monash Victoria: Clayton, Project. PEEL the from Learning (eds) Northfield J.R. and Baird JR. In procedures. classroom Some (1992) I.J. Mitchell, and J.A. Mitchell, Media. Learning Wellington: Curriculum. Zealand New the in Science (1993) Zealand) (New Education of Ministry Media. Learning Wellington: Draft. Curriculum: National the in Science (1992) Zealand) (New Education of Ministry Education). of Department the was it 1989, (in Media Learning ton: Welling- Draft. Syllabus: Science 1—5 Forms (1989) Zealand) (New Education of Ministry Printer. Government Alberta Edmonton: Education. Science of Goals the Unifying Education: STS (1990) (Alberta) Education of Ministry Press. OISE Toronto: Teacher. Holistic The (1993) J.P. Miller, 587—96. 11:

Education, Science of Journal International criticisms, Constructive (1989) R. Millar, 173—92. 81: Education, Science ing,

teach- science in explanation driven Consensually (1997) E. Woodruff, and K. Meyer, Methuen. London: Thought. Scientific in Intuition and Induction (1969) PB. Medawar, Methuen. London: Soluble. the of Art The (1967) PB. Medawar, Press. sity Univer- Harvard MA: Cambridge, Biology. of Philosophy New a Toward (1988) E. Mayer, Matters. Multilingual Clevedon: Work. Education Multicultural Making (1994) S. May, 5—14. 6: Education, and Science education, science in constructivism and philosophy on comments Introductory (1997) M.R. Matthews, Press. Dunmore North: Palmerston Education. Science Zealand New Challenging (1995) MR. Matthews, Routledge. York: New Science. of Philosophy and History of Role The Teaching: Science (1994) M.R. Matthews, 8. August, 26 Herald, Zealand New The sciences, degrades reform Curriculum 3b) (199 M.R. Matthews, 359—70. 2: Technology, and Education Science of Journal problems, epistemological some education: science and Constructivism 993a) (1 M.R. Matthews, Viking. York: New Nature. Human of Reaches Farther The (1971) A.H. Maslow, Row. & Harper York: New Personality. and Motivation (1970) A. Maslow, 206—19. 2: Review, Educational change, for potential its and paradox a curriculum: the across Language (1976) N. Martin, 324—8. 34: Reading, of Journal science, Reading (1991) J.V. Mallow, 193—208. 19: Education, Science of Journal International environments, learning on perspective constructivist social A (1997) K. Tobin, and C. McRobbie, 83—93. 3 85: Mathematics, and Science School childhood, early for education science Sciencing: (1985) M.R. McNairy, Publications. Technology Educational NJ: Cliffs, Englewood Perspectives. Learning Situated (1996) (ed.) H. McLellan, 191 •

References

192 • Teaching and learning science Muthukrishna, N., Carmine, D., Grossen, B. and Miller, S. (1993) Children's alternative frameworks: should they be directly addressed by science instruction?, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30: 233—48. Nadeau, R. and Desautels, J.F. (1984) Epistemology and the Teaching of Science: A Discussion

Paper. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada. Nersessian, N.J. (1989) Conceptual change in science and in science education, Synthese, 80: 163—83. Newman, D., Griffin, P. and Cole, M. (1989) The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Newton-Smith, W.H. (1981) The Rationality of Science. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Nicholls, J.G. (1984) Achievement motivation: conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance, Psychological Review, 91: 328—46. Nicholls, J.G. (1989) The Competitive Ethos and Democratic Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Nickerson, R.S. (1986) Reasoning. In R.F. Dillon and R.J. Sternberg (eds) Cognition and Instruction. New York: Academic Press.

Norris, S.P. (1997) Intellectual independence for nonscientists and other contenttranscendent goals of science education, Science Education, 81: 239—58.

Nott, M. and Smith, R. (1995) 'Talking your way out of it', 'rigging', and 'conjuring': what science teachers do when practicals go wrong, International Journal of Science Education, 17: 399—410.

Nott, M. and Wellington, J. (1996) When the black box springs open: practical work in school science and the nature of science, International Journal of Science Education, 18: 807—18.

Novak, J.D. (1989) The use of metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning. In P. Adey, J. Bliss, J. Head and M. Shayer (eds) Adolescent Development and School Science. Lewes: Palmer Press.

Novak, J.D. (1990) Concept maps and Vee diagrams: two metacognitive tools for science and mathematics education, Instructional Science, 19: 29—52. Nussbaum, J. (1985) The particulate nature of matter in the gaseous phase. In R. Driver, E. Guesne and A. Tiberghien (eds) Children's Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Nussbaum, J. and Novick, S. (1982) Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: toward a principled teaching strategy, Instructional Science, 11: 183— 200. Oakeshott, M. (1962) Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays. London: Methuen. Ogawa, M. (1995) Science education in a multi-science perspective, Science Education, 79: 583—93.

Ogunniyi, M.B., Jegede, O.J., Ogawa, M., Yandila, CD. and Oladele, F.K. (1995) Nature of worldview presuppositions among science teachers in Botswana, Indonesia, Japan, Nigeria and the Philippines, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32: 817—31.

O'Loughlin, M. (1992) Rethinking science education: beyond Piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29: 791—820.

Osborne, J.F. (1996) Beyond constructivism, Science Education, 80: 53—82. Osborne, J.F. (1997) Practical alternatives, School Science Review, 78(285): 61—6.

Osborne, R.J., Bell, B.F. and Gilbert, J.K. (1983) Science teaching and children's views of the world, European Journal of Science Education, 5: 1—14.

Penguin. Harmondsworth: Problems. Social Its and Knowledge Scientific (1971) J.R. Ravetz, Cassell. London: Schools. Primary in Science of Development the to Introduction An Science: Primary Encouraging (1987) J. Stringer, and G. Raper, Bacon. & Allyn MA: Heights, Needham Learn. to Motivation Student Increasing for Strategies and Structures Losers: without Winners (1993) J.P. Raffini, 15—26. 7: Education, Technological and Science in Research study, work practical biology in talk Pupil (1989) R. Lock, and M. Pugh,

preliminary

a

—

5—16. 22: Researcher, Educational

learning, in possibilities versus problems ideas: of value The (1993) R.S. Prawat, 211—27. 66:

Education, Science change, conceptual of theory a toward conception: scientific a of Accommodation (1982) W.A. Gertzog, and P.W. Hewson, K.A., Strike, G.J., Posner, Press. University Oxford Oxford: Knowledge. Objective (1972) K.R. Popper, Hutchinson. London: Discovery. Scientific of Logic The (1968) K.R. Popper, 49—73. 24: Education, Science in Studies

field, the mapping diversity: cultural and education Science (1994) D. Pomeroy, Paul. Kegan and Routledge London: Philosophy. Post-Critical a Towards Knowledge: Personal (1958) M. Polanyi, 167—99. 63: Research, Educational of Review change, conceptual of process the in factors contextual classroom and beliefs motivational of role the change: conceptual cold Beyond (1993) R.A. Boyle, and R.W. Marx, P.R., Pintrich, 224—50. 22: Quarterly,

Education and Anthropology cultures, school and peer, family, of boundaries the ing negotiat- worlds: multiple Students' (1991) H.T. Cao, and A.L. Davidson, P., Phelan, Kid. of University IPN, Kiel: edn. 4th Education, and Frameworks Alternative Students' Bibliography: (1994) R. Duit, and H. Pfundt, Science

16—25. 18: Researcher,

Educational context-bound?, skills cognitive Are (1989) G. Salomon, and D.N. Perkins, 199—208. 4: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal literacy, scientific to Referents (1966) C.W. Gale, and G.T. O'Hearn, M.O., Pella, 463—85. 32: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal research, action through tion educa- STS implementing action: to rhetoric From (1995) D. Hodson, and E. Pedretti, Association. Reading International DE: Newark, edn. 2nd Instruction, Reading About Say to Has Research What (eds) Farstup A.E. and Samuels S.J. In comprehension. reading in expertise Developing (1992) G.G. Duffy, and J.A. Dole, L.R., Roehler, P.D., Pearson, 107—23. 38: Psychology, of Journal Australian learning, and reading children's promote to curriculum metacognitive A (1986) .R. D Cross, and D.A. Saarnio, S.G., Paris, 39—52. 12 76: Psychology, Educational of Journal comprehension, and awareness reading children's improve to program a strategies learning: for Informed (1984) M.Y. Lipson, and D.R. Cross, S.G., Paris, 117—75. 1: Instruction, and Cognition activities, monitoring and comprehension-fostering of teaching Reciprocal (1984) A.L. Brown, and A.S. Palincsar, 59—87. 12: Education, Science in Studies education, science for implications its and model learning generative The (1985) M. Wittrock, and R. Osborne, Heinemann. Auckland: Science.

Children's of Implications The Science: in Learning (1985) P. Freyberg, and R. Osborne, 825—38. 20: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal water, of state of change the of conceptions Children's (1983) M. Cosgrove, and R. Osborne, 193 •

References

194 • Teaching and learning science Riding, R., Burton, D., Rees, G. and Sharratt, M. (1995) Cognitive style and personality in 12 year old children, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65: 113—24.

Rivard, L.P. (1994) A review of writing to learn in science: implications for practice and research, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31: 969—8 3.

Roberts, D.A. (1988) What counts as science education? In P. Fensham (ed.) Development and Dilemmas in Science Education. Lewes: Falmer Press.

Roberts, M. (1998) Indigenous knowledge and Western science: perspectives from the Pacific. In D. Hodson (ed.) Science and Technology Education and Ethnicity: An Aotearoa/New Zealand Perspective. Wellington: The Royal Society of New Zealand. Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Rogoff, B. (1991) Social interaction as apprenticeship in thinking: guidance and participation in spatial planning. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine and S.D. Teasley (eds) Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Rokeach, M. (1960) The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books. Rosenthal, R. and Jacobson, L. (1968) Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils' Intellectual Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Ross, K. and Sutton, C. (1982) Concept profiles and the cultural context, European Journal of Science Education, 4: 311—23.

Roth, K. and Anderson, C. (1988) Promoting conceptual change learning from science textbooks. In P. Ramsden (ed.) Improving Learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan Page.

Roth, W.-M. and Alexander, T. (1997) The interaction of students' scientific and religious discourses: two case studies, International Journal of Science Education, 19: 12 5—46.

Roth, W.-M. and Roychoudhury, A. (1993) The development of science process skills in authentic contexts, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30: 127—52. Rowe, MB. (1973) Teaching Science as Continuous Inquiry. New York: McGraw Hill.

Rowe, M.B. (1974) Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic and fate control, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11: 81—94.

Rowell, J., Dawson, C. and Lyndon, H. (1990) Changing misconceptions: a challenge in science education, International Journal of Science Education, 12: 167—75.

Rudduck, J. and Cowie, H. (1988) An introduction to cooperative group work, Educational and Child Psychology, 5: 91—102.

Rumelhart, D.E. and Norman, D.A. (1981) Accretion, tuning and restructuring: three modes of learning. In R.L. Klatzky and J.W. Cotton (eds) Semantic Factors in Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Saunders, W.L. (1992) The constructivist perspective: implications and teaching strategies for science, School Science and Mathematics, 92: 136—41. Saxe, GB. (1991) Culture and Cognitive Development: Studies in Mathematical Understand-

ing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1994) Computer support for knowledge-building communities, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3: 265—83. Schank, R. (1990) Tell Me a Story: A New Look at Real and Artificial Memory. New York: Macmillan.

Schibeci, R.A. (1984) Attitudes to science: an update, Studies in Science Education, 11: 26—59.

Schibeci, R.A. (1987) Helping students work independently: using projects in science teaching, Australian Science Teachers Journal, 33: 9 1—4.

177—93. 32: Teaching, Science in Research of Journal solving, problem in use its and concept mole the of understanding students' of investigations Two (1995) AT. Lumpe, and JR. Stayer,

387—98. 78: Education, Science education, ence sci- and universalism, Multiculturalism, (1994) NW. Brickhouse, and W.B. Stanley, Press. College Teachers York: New Reform. on Perspectives International Education: STS (1994) (eds) G. Aikenhead, and J. Solomon, 37—44. 78(280): Review, Science School esteem,

self- and motivation course: science GNVQ a on learning Student (1996) J. Solomon, Routledge. London: Science. in Ideas Informal Children's (eds) Lucas A.M. and Black P.J. In knowledge. scientific children's of construction social The (1993) J. Solomon, Press. sity Univer- Open Keynes: Milton Science. School in Work Practical of Reality and Role The Science: Practical (ed.) Woolnough BE. In life. laboratory School (1991) J. Solomon, 317—26. 11: Education, Science of Journal International laboratory, teaching the in behaviour of study A (1989) J. Solomon, 63—82. 14: Education, Science in Studies science, of understanding pupils' of construction the on influences Social (1987) J. Solomon, 101—43. 2: tion,

Educa- Science in Studies science, school of demythologizing the education: science of foundations sociological and philosophical The (1975) FE. Nunan, and J.J. Smolicz, 265—94. 3: Education, and Science 1, part education: scientific and knowledge scientific of Sociology (1994) P. Slezak, Bacon. and Allyn Boston: edn. 2nd Practice, and Research Theory, Learning: Cooperative (1995) R.E. Slavin, Press. Plenum York: New Learn. to Cooperating Cooperate, to Learning (eds) Schmuck R. and Webb C. Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. Kagan, S. Sharan, S. Slavin, R. In research. learning cooperative to introduction An (1985) RE. Slavin, 531—47. 60: Research, Educational of Review learning, meaningful of Phases (1990) T.J. Shuell, Press. University Open Keynes: Milton Science. in Ideas Children's (eds) Tiberghien A. and Guesne E. Driver, R. In circuits. simple in Electricity (1985) D. Shipstone, Press. College Teachers York: New Science. in Learning Children's on Perspective Constructivist A Light: to Bring Children What (1994) B.L. Shapiro, University. Queen's ON: Kingston, II. vol. Education, Science in Science of Philosophy and History (ed.) Hills G.L.C. In science. school to initiation the in features cultural and social personal, of study the to approach an learning: science of life A (1992) B.L. Shapiro, Press. Falmer Lewes: Education. Science in Dilemmas and Development (ed.) Fensham P.J. In light. to bring children What (1988) B.L. Shapiro, and Philosophy Educational literacy, science On (1988) E. Shahn, Books. Trentham Trent: 42—52. 20: Theory,

Stoke-on- Education. Humane on Handbook Teachers' A Earthkind: (1995) D. Selby, Press. University Harvard MA: Cambridge, Cognition. Everyday (eds) Lave J. and Rogoff B. In intelligence. working Studying (1984) S. Scribner, SCCC. Ferry: Broughty Future. the to Looking Schools: Scottish in Education Science (1996) Curriculum the on Council Consultative Scottish Wheatsheaf. Harvester York: New Knowing. and Learning of Ways Cognition: and Context (eds) Butterworth G. and Light P. In school. of out and in reasoning Proportional (1992) D.W. Carraher, and AD. Schliemann, 195 •

References

196 • Teaching and learning science Stead, B.F. (1980) Living. Working paper no. 15, Learning in Science Project. Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato. Stipek, D.J. (1993) Motivation to Learn: From Theory to Practice, 2nd edn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Strike, K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1985) A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. West and A.L. Pines (eds) Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. New York: Academic Press. Strike, K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1992) A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R.A. Duschl and R.J. Hamilton (eds) Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany: State University of New York Press. Suchting, WA. (1992) Constructivism deconstructed, Science and Education, 1: 22 3—54. Sutton, C. (1992) Words, Science and Learning. Buckingham: Open University Press. Sutton, C. (1996) Beliefs about science and beliefs about language, International Journal of Science Education, 18: 1—18.

Swift, J.N. and Gooding, C.T. (1983) Interaction of wait time, feedback and questioning instruction on middle school science teaching, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20: 721—30. Tendencia, C. (ed.) (1987) Science and Technology Education towards Informed Citizenship.

Proceedings of the 5th ACASE-Asian Symposium. Penang: RECSAM. Tharp, R. and Gallimore, R. (eds)(1988) Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning and Schooling in Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Theobald, D.W. (1968) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. London: Methuen. Thomas, E.L. and Robinson, HA. (1972) Improving Reading in Every Class: A Sourcebook for Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Thorley, N.R. and Stofflett, R.T. (1996) Representation of the conceptual change model in science teacher education, Science Education, 80: 317—39. Timm, J. (1992) Self-esteem is for Everyone (SEE) Program. Tampa, FL: Learning Advantages.

Toulmin, S.E. (1972) Human Understanding. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tudge, J. (1990) Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. In L.C. Moll (ed.) Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology. Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press.

Tunnicliffe, S.D. (1989) Challenge based science. In B.N. Honeyman (ed.) Science Education and the Quality of Life. ICASE Yearbook. Australian Science Teachers Asso-

ciation/International Council of Associations for Science Education. Tyson, L.M., Venville, G.J., Harrison, AG. and Treagust, D.F. (1997) A multidimensional framework for interpreting conceptual change events in the classroom, Science Education, 81: 387—404. E. (1987) Construction of Knowledge. Salinas, CA: Intersystems Publications. von Glasersfeld, E. (1989) Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching, Synthese, 80: 121—40.

von Glasersfeld,

von Glasersfeld, E. (1992) Constructivism reconstructed: a reply to Suchting, Science and Education, 1: 379—84. Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley. Vygotsky, L.S. (1962) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L.S. (1987) The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky: Problems of General Psychology.

New York: Plenum Press.

39—44.

27: Journal, Teachers Science Australian

spirit?, the fit laboratory the in practice Does (1981) J. Gilbert, and A. Zilbersztain, Books. Association Free London: Teaching. Science racist Anti- (eds) Levidow L. and Gill D. In science. racist society, Racist (1987) R.M. Young, Press. York New of University State Albany: Education. Science in Reform as Science/Technology/Society (1996) (ed.) R.E. Yager, Press. University

Cambridge Cambridge:

Science. in

Work Practical (1985) T. Allsop, and B. Woolnough, 17: Psychiatry, and Psychology Child of Journal

89—100.

solving, problem in tutoring of role The (1976) G. Ross, and J.S. Bruner, D., Wood, Routledge. London: Think. to Learning (eds) Woodhead M. Light, P. In learning. and teaching of Aspects (1991) D. Wood,

and Sheldon

S.

21—37.

23: Education, Science in

Studies

learning, of quality the and Metacognition (1994) I.J. Mitchell, and R.T. White, 77—86. 5 11: Education, Science of Journal national Inter- change, conceptual and Metalearning (1989) R.F. Gunstone, and R.T. White, 761—74. 18: Education, Science of Journal International learning, and laboratory the between link The (1996) R.T. White, Press. University Open Buckingham: Science. School in Work Practical of Reality and Role The Science: Practical (ed.) Woolnough B.E. In work. practical of conduct and purpose the and Episodes (1991) R.T. White, 37—9. 67: Education, Science rationality?, is 'rational' How (1983) A.L. Pines, and L.H.T. West, Heinemann. NH: Portsmouth, Literacy. and Inquiry of Centers as Classrooms Together: Knowledge Constructing (1992) G.L. Chang-Wells, and G. Wells, Kong. Hong Conference, Education in Language the paper, ence Confer- apprenticeship. semiotic as schooling inquiry: and talk Text, (1993) G. Wells, Routledge. London: Education. Science in Processes and Skills (ed.) Wellington J.J. In introduction. an education: science in processes and Skills (1989) J.J. Wellington, Minnesota. of University Minneapolis: 2. vol. Conference, Teaching Science and Philosophy, History, International Third (eds) Fifield S. and Rhees D. Allchin, D. Finley, F. In misconceptions? tomorrow's models today's Are (1995) M.A. Weck, 266—76. 50: Psychology, Educational of Journal British groups, ability geneous hetero- in errors mathematical and interaction group of analysis An (1984) N. Webb, 83—97. 16: Education, Science of Journal International education, science constructivist in thinking animistic and anthropomorphic viving

re- science: school feminizing and Humanizing (1994) D. Bentley, and D.M. Watts, 121—35. 13: Journal, Research Educational British deeds, and words by change ceptual conenabling classroom: the in Constructivism (1987) D. Bentley, and D.M. Watts, 91—5. 76(277): Review, Science School science, in questions pupils' of quality the understanding: conceptual and Questioning (1995) 5. Alsop, and D.M. Watts, 31—8. 75(271): Review, Science School laboratory, the in investigations managing project: (OPENS) science in work Open-ended (1993) B. Fairbrother, and R. Watson, 1987). Solomon, by (cited Oxford of University thesis, MSc Unpublished ence. sci- practical doing groups year second within interactions Social (1986) J. Wallace, 197 • References

... Index

Aikenhead, G.S., 1, 3, 63, 105, 112,

135, 139—40, 163

30, 134 apprenticeship, 95, 106, 115, 118, anthropomorphism,

123—4, 149—51, 156, 179—80

and evaluation, 43, 70, 73, 103, 138, 164, 173, 175, 177

assessment

Ausubel,

D.P., 26, 37, 91, 131

Bakhtin, MM., 108

B.F., 28, 29, 49, 56 Bloom, J.W., 54, 134, 138 border crossing, 100, 102, 112, 125, Bell,

concept maps, 26, 35, 42, 133, 138—9, 162

conceptual change (reorganization), 37—42, 49, 52—6, 71, 74, 113, 115, 131

conceptual structures, 6, 11—12, 17—18, 25, 27, 90—2, 154 connoisseurship, 19—20, 98, 115, 150, 152, 177, 179—80

consensus, 16, 53, 74, 92 correlational studies, 22, 106, 119, 123, 148, 152 Costa, YB., 104—6

128—9, 131, 133, 135—42, 163—4, DARTs, 160—1, 164

167

Bruner, J.S., 87—8, 97, 163 children's science, 26—3 1, 36—7, 40, 50, 104

citizenship (science education for), 1, 29, 159 classroom language, see language of classroom Claxton, G., 38, 49, 58—60, 76, 78,

Demastes, S.S., 113, 136, 142 demonstrations, see teacher demonstrations doing science, 5, 11, 60, 117—20, 143—4, 148—9, 151—2, 161, 166—7, 168 Driver,

R., 26, 33—4, 37, 47, 49, 130,

146

Dweck, C.S., 63—5

89 Cobern,

W.W., 135—6, 139

collateral learning, 137, 141 common sense, 32, 45, 48, 52, 89—90, 95—6, 104, 116—17, 121, 128—31

community of scientists, 16, 19, 20, 46—7, 52—3, 55, 88, 92—3, 95—9,

102, 112, 115, 118, 121, 123, 141, 144, 158, 166

economic issues, 1, 2, 16, 17 emotional climate, 5, 35, 54—5, 58—9, 78, 97, 175—9 empowerment, 2 1—2, 88

environmental issues, 1, 3, 4, 6, 21, 178

episodic knowledge, 35, 147—8 epistemological profile, 132

137 104, 100,

P.,

Phelan,

172 170, 166, 162, 158, 154, 142, 138, 134—7, 131, 127—9, 121, 115, 113, 112, 106, 98, 95, 85, 82—3, 74—5, 70, 67, 49—57, 27, understanding, of framework personal 180 110, 97, 64—71, goals, performance 2 MO., Pella, 134 43, project, PEEL

178 120, 115, 36, 21—2, ownership, 42 34—5, 32, 30, 27, R.J., Osborne, 162 92, 47, J.F., Osborne, 125 109, M., O'Loughlin, 152 149, 145, 141, 130, 118, 94, 92, 47—8, 45, 37, 31, 27, 23—5, 17—19, 10—15, observation, 125 113, 14—15, science, normal

70 64, J.G., Nicholls, 136 106, R., Nadeau, 141 science, of myths 171 168, 143—4, 133, 99, 97, 96, 78—82, 67—70, 60—4, 43, motivation, 21 17, issues, moral-ethical 146 132, 52, 50, 18, models, 179 176—7, 169—70, 149—52, 121, 106, 98, 96, 88, 73, 67, modelling, 142 138, 132—4, 98, 94, 83, 71—2, 67—8, 42, metacognition, 130 90—2,

66, 56—7, 48, 44—6, M.R., Matthews, goals learning see goals, mastery Maslow, 61—2 A.,

93 H., Longino, 88 A.N., Leont'ev, 159 124, 103, 52,

J.L.,

159 141,

123—5,

103, 90—1, 82, 55, 51—2, 46,

28—9, 23—4, 15, science, of

31,

language

169 108—10, 102—3, 81, 67,

classroom, of language

115 14—15, T.S., Kuhn, 130 94—5, D., Kuhn, 70 67, A.W., Kruglanski, 140—1 AR., King, 171 78, D.W., Johnson, 141 135—7, 0., Jegede,

137 21—2, 7, 4,

curriculum/learning, issues-based 83 62, 53, 20, 19, intuition, 180

178, 171, 169, 160, 151, 132—3, 94, 88, 36, 9, 3, independence, intellectual 120—3 learning, inquiry-based 141 19, 12—14, induction,

180 153, 148, 144, 140—1, 118, 104, 92, 50, 47, 21, 20, 17, 13, 4, D., Hodson, 142 131, 42, 39, 37, P.W., Hewson, 147 69, 42, 37—8, 35, 25, R.F., Gunstone, 171—4 157, 121—3, 98—9, 76—82, 43, 40, 35—6, work, group 162 151, 145, 135, 132, 128, 29, 1, education, science of goals 139 130, 48, D., Gil-Perez, 178 175, 163, 135—7, 125, 112, 103—5, 81—2, 59, 54, 6, 5, class), and (ethnicity gender

Lemke,

152 149, 141, 130, 123, 118, 106, 94, 48, 37, 25, 22, 18—19, 13—15, 11, experiments,

180 110, 97, 64—71, goals, learning 168 161, 151—2, 148—9,

146 37, 35, 1, P.J., Fensham, 141 20, science, feminist

168 161, 151—2, 145—8, 143—4, 117—20, 91, 75, 60, 48, 41, 5, science, learning

143—4, 135, 129—31, 117—20, 102, 92—5, 5, science, about learning

sense

135—7, 125, 112, 103—5, 81—2, 59, 54, 6, 5, class), and (gender ethnicity

114 21, 4, D., Layton, 150 114, 95—6, 31, J., Lave,

common see understanding, everyday 178 175, 163,

learner

171 168, 149—52, 144—5, 133, 129, 109, 107, 97, 79—80, control,

199 •

Index

200 • Teaching and learning science Piaget, J., 37, 86, 88, 116 P-O-E (predict-observe-explain), 37, 147

politicization, 3, 4, 6, 21, 22, 70, 125, 137

Pomeroy, D., 81, 137, 139 Popper, K.R., 14, 99 portfolios, 43, 167, 175 Posner, G.J., 39, 42, 52—4, 95, 113, 116, 133, 142 power (issues of), 53, 76—7, 102, 106—7, 110, 125, 178

prediction, 13, 14, 25, 37, 147 problem solving, 6, 148 processes of science, 24, 25, 118—19, 141, 143, 150

questions/questioning, 35—6, 55, 96,

scientific revolutions, 14—16, 113, 125 scientific theory, 11, 15, 18, 24, 48, 50, 52, 128, 146 scientific truth, 14, 18, 45, 47 self-esteem, 36, 59—62, 64, 66, 69, 73,

78, 97, 99, 101, 137, 172, 176 Shapiro, B.L., 37, 42—3, 78, 83 situated cognition, 31, 50, 95—6, 114—18

Slavin, R.E., 78, 172—3 Smolicz, J.J., 93—4

social and environmental action, 4, 21, 22

Solomon, J., 1, 64, 74, 76—8, 80 Stead, B.F., 28, 29, 49, 56 STS (science-technology-society), 1, 3, 4, 21, 115 Sutton, C., 51, 57, 160, 162—3

107—9, 121, 122, 138—9, 149, 154—5

tacit knowledge, 19, 83, 120 talking, 5, 80, 85—6, 102, 121—5, 147,

radical constructivism, 45—8 Ravetz, J.R., 150, 176 reading, 155, 159—61, 166—7, 174

realism, 45, 50, 95, 132 reflection, 40, 41—3, 73, 75, 149, 151, 169—70, 173, 179

relativism, 46, 66, 95 Rowell, J., 9, 40 scaffolding, 67, 86—7, 96—8, 102, 121,

133, 145, 159, 169, 171 science education goals/purpose, see goals of science education Science for all Americans, 2, 3 scientific classification, 24—5 scientific community, see community of scientists

scientific investigation/inquiry, 4, 6, 9, 11—12, 19, 23—5, 36, 46—7, 94, 118—20, 123, 141, 147, 151—2, 165 scientific observation, see observation

scientific practice, 5, 94, 103

154—9, 166—7

teacher demonstrations, 35, 37, 40, 174 teacher questions, see questions/ questioning theory-building, 18, 28—30, 46, 50, 75, 91, 118, 131, 143, 159 Toulmin, SE., 134, 142 von Glasersfeld, E., 46—7, 56—7 Vroom, V.H., 62—3 Vygotsky, L.S., 71, 84—9, 96, 98, 123, 129, 132, 144—5

Wells, G., 123, 156, 169 White, R.T., 35, 41, 43, 129, 133—4, 147

worldview, 41, 135—7, 139, 163—4 writing, 35, 36, 155, 161—7, 174

ZPD (zone of proximal development), 71, 86—7, 97, 106, 123, 129, 132—3, 144, 168, 170, 172, 177